RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS 

1813-1873 

BY 

JOHN   EARL   RUSSELL 


"  Ille  potens  sui 
*  Laetnsque  deget,  cui  licet  in  diem 
Dixisse,  Vixi ;  eras  vel  atra 
Nube  polum  Pater  occupato, 
Vel  sole  puro :  non  tamen  irritum, 
Quodcunque  retro  est,  efficiet ;  iieque 
Diffinget,  infectumque  reddet, 
Quod  fugiens  semel  hora  vexit." 

HoR.  Lib.  3,  Ode  29 


"  Not  heaven  itself  upon  the  past  has  power, 
But  what  has  been  has  been,  and  I  have  had  my  hour." 

Drvden 


BOSTON 

ROBERTS      BROTHERS 

1S75 


5^ 


^ 

^ 


f-T$» 


"*^ 


SPRECKELS 


Cambridge : 
Press  of  John  Wilson  and  Son, 


PREFACE. 


Some  persons  who  may  cast  their  eyes  upon  this 
book,  with  the  hope  of  finding  that  the  whole 
work  is  new,  may  be  disappointed,  and  even  con- 
sider themselves  deceived,  by  discovering  that 
they  have  at  second-hand  what  they  have  al- 
ready read  in  the  introduction  to  my  report  of 
my  '  Speeches  and  Despatches.'  But  I  hope  my 
explanation  will  satisfy  them  that  I  have  acted  for 
the  reader's  benefit  in  thus  repeating  what  has 
been  already  read,  instead  of  furnishing  him  with 
an  article  entirely  original. 

The  fact  is,  that  after  I  had  proceeded  some 
way  in  my  task  I  found  that  my  memory  of  past 
transactions  was  not,  after  the  lapse  of  some  years, 
so  lively  as  it  had  been  when  I  wrote  the  original 
introduction.  I  have,  therefore,  satisfied  myself 
with  copying  in  the  first  pages  the  work  which  I 
had  already  published. 


113587 


IV  PREFACE. 

It  may  interest  some  persons  to  learn  what  edu- 
cation I  had  received  before  I  entered  Parliament. 
That  education  was  in  part  broken  and  disturbed. 
After  being  at  a  private  school  at  Sunbury,  I 
went  to  Westminster,  but  was  so  ill  there  that, 
by  the  care  and  affection  of  my  step-mother,  the 
Duchess  of  Bedford,  my  father  was  persuaded  to 
remove  me,  and  I  was  sent  with  several  young 
men  of  riper  age  to  receive  private  tuition  from 
the  Rev.  Mr.  Smith,  of  Woodnesbury,  in  Kent. 
There  I  formed  relations  of  friendship  with  the 
Earl  of  Clare,  the  late  Duke  of  Leinster,  his  brother, 
Lord  William  Fitzgerald,  and  others.  But  I  had 
not  remained  there  long,  Avhen  Lord  and  Lady 
Holland  proposed  that  I  should  accompany  them 
on  a  journey  to  Spain  in  the  troubled  year  1808. 
When  I  returned  from  Spain,  in  1810, 1  asked  my 
father  to  allow  me  to  go  to  the  University  of  Cam- 
bridge. But  he  told  me  that  in  his  opinion  there 
was  nothing  to  be  learnt  at  English  Universities, 
and  procured  for  me  admission  to  the  house  of 
Professor  Playfair,  at  Edinburgh. 

There  I  had  my  studies  directed  and  my  charac- 
ter developed  by  one  of  the  best  and  the  noblest, 
the  most  upright,  the  most  benevolent,  and  the 
most  liberal  of  all  philosophers. 


PREFACE.  V 

Some  years  afterwards  I  travelled  again  in  Spain 
with  my  cousin,  the  late  Earl  of  Bradford,  and 
Eobert  Clive,  the  son  of  Lord  Powis.  In  the 
course  of  these  travels  I  became  acquainted  with 
the  Duke  of  Wellington,  and  had  occasion  to  ad- 
mire the  calmness,  the  directness,  and  the  patriot- 
ism wdiich  distinguished  his  character. 

But  I  need  not  follow  this  narrative  any  further. 
[  was  about  to  accompany  my  companions  to  Con- 
stantinople, and  return  home  by  way  of  Moscow  and 
St.  Petersburgh,  when  I  w^as  informed  by  a  letter 
from  my  father  that  his  old  friend,  the  acute  and 
witty  Fitzpatrick,  was  dead,  and  that  he  intended 
to  propose  me  as  candidate  for  Tavistock.  Thus  I 
became  a  member  of  Parliament  before  I  was  of 
age,  and  from  that  time  my  political  life  begins. 

Before  I  conclude  this  Preface,  I  may  mention 
that  at  Edinburgh  a  public  dinner  was  sometimes 
held  to  commemorate  the  birthday  of  Mr.  Fox. 
At  one  of  these  dinners,  presided  over  by  Lord 
Kinnaird,  the  following  toast  was  given :  — 

^The  Houses  of  Russell  and  Cavendish.  May 
they  ever  be  united  in  the  cause  of  freedom  ! ' 

I  was  called  upon  by  the  chairman  to  acknowl- 
edge the  toast.     I  then  said  :  — 

'  It  gives  me  great  pleasure  to  acknowledge  the 


VI  PREFACE. 

toast  which  has  just  been  announced  by  the  chair- 
man. It  is  a  satisfaction  to  me  to  reflect  that 
your  favor  is  obtained,  not  by  the  accidental  quali- 
ties of  talents  and  power,  but  by  a  steady  adher- 
ence to  those  principles  which  animated  Mr.  Fox 
through  life,  and,  holding  it  by  that  tenure,  I  trust 
that  it  will  never  be  forfeited/ 

RUSSfXL. 

Aldwoutii,  October  30,  1874. 


CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER  PAGB 

1 1 

II.    Policy  of  Lord  Palmerston  in  the  East 183 

III.  Faults   of    Sir  Robert  Peel's  Policy  —  His  Resig- 

nation IN  1846  —  Triumph  of  Free  Trade  ....    193 

IV.  Defeat  of  the  Philosophical  Radicals  —  Suppres- 

sion OF  THE  Chartist  Riots,  1848 205 

V.    Constitution  of  the  House  of  Commons  —  Choice,  of 

Leaders 213 

VI.    Ministry  of  Lord  Aberdeen —  Origin  of  the  Crimean 

y  War 221 

*^VII.    Foreign  Policy   from  1859  to  the  Death  of  Lord 

Palmerston 226 

VIII.  Reform  Bill  of  1867  —  Mr.  Gladstone's  Speech  on 
the  Irish  Church — General  Election  —  Change 
OF  Ministry  —  Retirement  from  the  Lead  that  I 

HAD  held  since  1834 239  V 

IX.    Justice  to  Ireland 243 

X.    Tenants  in  Ireland 298 

XI.    National  Education 305 

XII.    Treaty  of  Washington 323 

XIII.  Policy  for  the  Future 335 

XIV.  General     Election  —  Fall    of    Mr.    Gladstone's 

Ministry  . , 839 

XV.    Concluding  Chapter 346 


APPENDICES 375 

INDEX 381 


EECOLLECTIONS    AND    SUGGES     _ 


THr    >- 


CHAPTER    I. 


UNrVEfis 


I  WAS  elected  a  Member  of  Parliament  for  the  bor- 
ough of  Tavistock  in  July,  1813,  just  a  month  before  I 
became  of  age. 

The  state  of  public  affairs  at  that  moment  was  one, 
if  not  of  anxiety,  yet  of  the  highest  interest.  The 
great  Revolutionary  War,  which  had  continued  with 
intervals  from  the  invasion  of  France  by  the  Duke  of 
Brunswick  in  1792,  was  evidently  drawing  to  a  close. 
That  war  may  properly  be  divided  into  two  very  dis- 
tinct periods.  First,  the  vain,  weak,  and  ineffectual 
struggle  of  the  Powers  of  Europe  against  the  insane 
strength  of  the  French  Revolution,  terminated  by  the 
Treaty  of  Campo  Formio,  and  the  Treaty  of  Ratisbon, 
on  the  Continent  of  Europe,  and  by  the  Peace,  or  more 
properly,  the  Truce  of  Amiens,  between  England  and 
France.  Secondly,  the  struggle  maintained  on  the  one 
side  by  Napoleon  Bonaparte  with  infinite  ability,  infinite 
ambition,  and  an  entire  disregard  of  moral  or  religious 
scruples,  with  a  view  to  make  himself  despotic  master 
of  every  country  in  Europe ;  on  the  other  side,  by  the 
resisting  power  of  England,  and  by  the  spirit  of  national 
independence,  first  roused  on  the  Continent  in  the  breasts 
of  the  Spanish  people,  and  extending  from   them,  as 

1 


2  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

opportunity  arose,  to  the  people  of  Russia,  of  Germany, 
of  Holland,  and  of  Northern  Italy. 

For  some  years  the  conduct  of  the  war  on  the  part  of 
the  Allies,  forms  a  strange  contrast  to  the  skill  with 
which  William  III.,  Marlborough,  and  Prince  Eugene 
had  conducted  the  Grand  Alliance  against  France,  and 
to  the  spirit  and  military  talent  which  Frederick  the 
Great  and  Lord  Chatham  had  displayed  in  the  Seven 
Years'  War  against  the  forces  of  France,  Austria,  and 
Russia.  In  1792,  the  Duke  of  Brunswick,  in  contra- 
diction to  his  own  views  and  opinions,  had  issued  a  proc- 
lamation inspired  by  the  French  Royalist  emigration, 
threatening  with  condign  punishment  the  National 
Assembly  of  France,  and  all  who  held  political,  munic- 
ipal, or  other  offices  under  the  French  Republic.  This 
atrocious  attempt  to  deprive  France  of  the  rights  of  an 
independent  nation  was  soon  defeated  in  the  field,  and, 
by  the  just  resentment  which  it  provoked,  was  the  main 
cause  of  the  repeated  and  splendid  triumphs  of  the 
French  Republic.  The  beginning  of  the  war  was  a 
trial  of  energy  between  the  combatants,  and  in  point  of 
energy,  as  Mr.  Burke  has  confessed,  the  French  far 
excelled  their  opponents.  In  fact,  the  Allies  were  not 
only  without  energy,  but  without  any  motives  by  which 
enthusiasm  could  be  excited.  Each  great  Power  had 
its  own  separate  object.  Austria  wished  to  increase  her 
territory,  either  by  annexing  Bavaria,  or  by  conquering 
part  of  the  French  territory,  as  far  as  the  banks  of  the 
Somme.  Prussia  wished  only  to  enlarge  her  share  of 
the  partition  of  Poland,  and  employed  the  subsidies  of 
England  in  conveying  her  army  to  fight  the  Poles,  and 
acquire  new  provinces.  Russia  was  intent  solely  upon 
the  conquest  of  Poland,  and  her  crafty  Empress  ex- 
pressed in  many  pious  phrases  and  moral  maxims  the 


FIRST  REVOLUTIONARY  WAR.  3 

utmost  horror  antl  detestation  of  the  Jacobin  Conven- 
tion of  Paris,  while  her  real  object  was  to  inflame  the 
English  and  the  Germans  against  France.  In  the  mean 
time,  her  political  intrigues  and  overwhelming  legions 
secured  and  consolidated  her  Polish  conquests.  While 
she  betrayed  every  Polish  party,  and  crushed  those  to 
whom  she  had  promised  protection,  she  indulged  in  un- 
bounded licentiousness  at  St.  Petersburg,  and  laughed 
at  the  pious  zeal  excited  by  the  atheism  of  France. 

The  course  of  England,  though  more  honest  than 
that  of  the  Continental  Powers,  was  less  definite,  and 
less  likely  to  obtain  success.  The  restoration  of  the 
Bourbons  was  the  wish,  but  not  the  object  of  the  Eng- 
lish Government.^  The  maintenance  of  the  Austrian 
province  of  the  Netherlands  was  the  immediate  object 
of  Mr.  Pitt,  but  it  was  pursued  with  little  vigor  by 
means  of  subsidies  inconsiderately  thrown  away,  of 
negotiations  defeated  by  the  insincerity  of  Prussia,  and 
of  military  operations  conducted  by  an  English  general, 
totally  ignorant  of  the  art  of  war,  in  co-operation  with 
treacherous  allies. 

It  was  no  wonder  that  hostilities  thus  conducted, 
failed  of  success.  Nor  when  the  energy  of  the  Jacobin 
democracy  abated,  was  the  contest  of  military  skill 
which  followed  more  auspicious  to  the  Allies. 


1  This  wish  was  openly  avowed  by  Mr.  Pitt,  in  the  debate  on  the 
Peace  of  Amiens  :  — 

Me  si  fata  meis  paterentur  ducere  vitam 
Auspiciis,  et  sponte  mea  componere  curas, 
Urbem  Trojanam  priraum,  dulcesque  meorum 
Reliquias  colerem,  Priami  tecta  alta  manerent, 
Et  recidiva  manu  posuissem  Pergama  victis. 

A  natural  wish  in  the  breast  of  -^neas ;  a  very  strange  one  in  the  mouth' 
of  Mr.  Pitt. 


4  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

The  military  men  who  arose  in  France,  Pichegru, 
Moreau,  Heche,  Massena,  and  lastly  Napoleon  Bona- 
parte, defeated  and  dispersed  the  Allies  and  compelled 
them  to  agree  to  ignominious  terms  of  peace.  The 
allied  armies  were  usually  commanded  by  men  of  little 
reputation  at  the  time,  and  of  complete  obscurity  in  the 
present  age.  The  military  knowledge  of  the  Archduke 
Charles,  and  the  barbarous  ferocity  of  Suwarrow,  shine 
out  alone  amidst  the  dearth  of  talent  and  of  skill. 

The  second  act  of  the  great  tournament  of  Europe 
was  of  a  very  different  description.  Napoleon,  flushed 
with  success,  pretended  that  peace  never  could  be  made 
between  France  and  the  ancient  monarchies,  and  con- 
sidered his  own  supremacy  over  all  the  states  and 
nations  of  Europe  as  the  only  security  for  what  he 
and  others  called  the  principles  of  1789. 

This  pretension  alienated  those  in  England  and  on 
the  Continent  who  had  been  quite  willing  to  see  France 
constitute  herself  as  she ,  pleased,  and  even  enlarge  her 
boundaries  to  a  considerable  extent.  In  1805,  Mr.  Fox, 
in  opposition,  wrote  to  his  nephew,  Lord  Holland,  that 
it  was  no  time  to  talk  of  peace.  In  1806,  Mr.  Fox,  in 
office,  conducted  the  negotiation  which  broke  off  not 
merely,  as  he  told  his  nephew,  on  the  point  actually  in 
dispute,  but  on  account  of  the  evident  insincerity  of 
the  French  Government.  After  this  there  remained 
nothing  for  those  who  were  not  disposed  to  allow  Eng- 
land to  be  absorbed  in  the  French  Empire  but  to  resist 
and  to  persevere. 

The  task  seemed  not  only  a  difficult,  but  almost  a 
hopeless  one ;  no  amount  of  subsidy,  no  coalition  of 
Powers,  seemed  likely  to  end  otherwise  than  in  such 
defeats  as  Austerlitz,  Jena,  and  Friedland. 

Happily,  from  an  unexpected  quarter  appeared  the 


SECOND  REVOLUTIQNAEY  WAR.  5 

dawn  of  better  times.  Napoleon  invited  the  King  of 
Spain  and  his  heir  apparent  to  Bayonne  with  the  view 
of  betraying  and  dethroning  them.  Many  Spanish 
grandees  bowed  their  necks  beneath  the  yoke,  but 
every  Spanish  peasant  felt  his  own  honor  assailed  in 
the  persons  of  his  unworthy,  contemptible,  but  still 
national  Sovereigns. 

The  signal  fire  was  lighted  on  every  hill,  the  flame 
of  independence  blazed  up  in  every  bosom. 

Here  was  indeed  a  crisis  in  the  affairs  of  Europe. 
The  cause  of  national  independence,  which  in  the  first 
portion  of  the  war  was  defended  by  France,  was  now 
about  to  be  upheld  by  the'  other  nations  of  Europe. 
No  matter  how  ignorant,  how  ill-armed,  how  ill-led  the 
Spanish  people  might  be,  here  was  a  nation  animated 
by  a  real  enthusiasm  ;  ready  to  fight  in  the  field  of  bat- 
tle, in  the  town,  in  the  village,  in  the  farm-yard  and  in 
the  peasant's  cottage  for  the  sacred  cause  of  national 
independence. 

It  behooved  England,  therefore,  to  welcome  this  reviv- 
ing spirit,  to  expend  her  growing  treasures,  to  employ 
her  extensive  credit,  to  dispatch  her  most  skilful  oflicers, 
to  marshal  her  bravest  troops  in  defence  of  this  sacred 
cause.  England  might  be  exhausted  in  the  struggle, 
but  by  lifting  up  her  heart  to  meet  the  mighty  danger, 
and  by  an  attempt  to  free  herself  and  other  nations 
from  intolerable  slavery,  she  could  never  be  disgraced. 

Unhappily  Lord  Grenville  (who  became  head  of  the 
Ministry  in  1806),  and  the  leaders  of  the  Whigs,  did  not 
perceive  the  nature  of  the  change  that  had  taken  place. 

Lord  Grenville  in  the  former  war  had  directed  Lord 
Malmesbury  to  insist  upon  retaining  the  Netherland 
provinces  for  Austria,  when  the  attempt  was  hopeless. 
Indeed  Austria  herself,  when  beaten  in  Italy,  was  will- 


6  HECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

ing  to  yield  those  provinces  to  France.  Again,  when 
Napoleon,  as  first  Consul,  had  invited  England  to  make 
peace.  Lord  Grenville  had  informed  him  that  the  best 
way  of  giving  peace  to  Europe  was  to  replace  the 
Bourbons  on  the  throne  of  France. 

With  all  the  integrity,  and  with  more  than  the  abil- 
ities of  the  first  George  Grenville,  he  exactly  answered 
the  description  which  Burke  has  drawn  of  that  states- 
man. When  the  waters  were  but.  Lord  Grenville,  like 
his  father,  was  unable  to  discern  the  means  of  safety. 
Now  the  waters  were  out.  Lord  Grenville  and  the 
Whig  party  dwelt  on  precedents  of  former  wars ;  on 
the  inability  of  Sir  Arthur  Wellesley  to  maintain  him- 
self in  Portugal,  and  on  the  exhaustion  of  the  finances 
which  a  war  in  Spain  would  entail,  but  they  thought 
too  little  of  the  grandeur  of  the  struggle,  and  the  ob- 
vious certainty  that  England  or  Napoleon  must  fall  to 
rise  no  more.  Towards  the  end  of  the  year  1813,  when 
Lord  Grenville  had  begun  to  see  more  clearly  the  new 
aspect  of  affairs,  Mr.  Horner  wrote  to  Mr.  Allen,  at 
Holland  House,  in  the  following  terms  :  — 

'  Your  account  of  the  view  which  Lord  Grenville  is 
expected  to  take  of  Continental  affairs,  in  a  speech  upon 
the  first  day  of  the  session,  has  relieved  me  from  an 
anxiety  which  I  felt  on  that  subject ;  for  I  have  had 
fears  that  we  were  to  make  the  same  false  step  respect- 
ing this  German  war  that  has  been  so  fatal  to  the  party, 
and  deservedly  so,  with  respect  to  the  Spanish  cause. 
That  the  financial  difficulties  of  the  country  will  be 
increased  by  our  embarking  so  deeply  with  the  Allies, 
as  I  think  we  ought  to  do,  is  true  and  ought  not  to  be 
disguised  ;  that  the  sanguine  expectations,  professed  by 
the  friends  of  Government,  of  a  speedy  settlement  of 
the  affairs  of  Europe  have  apparently  no  just  foundation 


SPANISH  WAK.  T 

in  the  present  aspect  of  them,  ought  likewise,  in  my 
opinion,  to  be  stated ;  but  I  cannot  hesitate  now  in 
believing  that  the  determination  of  the  French  mili- 
tary force,  and  the  insurrection  of  national  spirit  in 
the  north  of  Germany,  form  a  new  conjunction  in  which 
the  Whigs  ought  to  adopt  the  war  system,  upon  the  very 
same  principle  which  prompted  them  to  stigmatize  it  as 
unjust  in  1793,  and  as  premature  in  1803.  The  crisis 
of  Spanish  politics  in  May,  1808,  seemed  to  me  the  first 
turn  of  things  in  a  contrary  direction,  and  I  have  never 
ceased  to  lament  that  our  party  took  a  course  so  incon- 
sistent with  the  true  Whig  principles  of  Continental 
policy,  so  revolting  to  the  popular  feelings  of  the  coun- 
try, and  to  every  true  feeling  for  the  liberties  and  in- 
dependence of  mankind.  To  own  that  error  now  is  a 
greater  effort  of  magnanimity  than  can  be  asked  for ; 
but  the  practical  effects  of  it  will  gradually  be  repaired, 
if  a  right  line  of  conduct  is  taken  with  respect  to  Ger- 
man affairs.'  ^ 

Such  were  the  opinions  of  Francis  Horner,  a  man 
thoroughly  imbued  with  Whig  principles,  who  had  mas- 
tered in  early  youth  the  soundest  doctrines  of  political 
economy,  who  spoke  in  Parliament  in  a  clear  and  manly 
style  of  eloquence,  who  acted  on  every  occasion  of  his 
short  public  life  in  the  highest  spirit  of  honor,  and 
whose  premature  death  caused  deep  and  lasting  afflic- 
tion to  all  who  knew  him  and  to  all  who  valued  liberty. 

But  it  is  time  to  explain  how  it  was  that  I  embraced 
with  warmth  the  opinions  of  Lord  Holland  and  Mr. 
Horner  in  reference  to  Spain,  rather  than  those  of  Lord 
Grenville  and  Lord  Grey. 

In  the  autumn  of  1808,  when  only  sixteen  years  of 

1  Life  of  Francis  Homer. 


8  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

age,  I  accompanied  Lord  and  Lady  Holland  to  Coninna, 
and  afterwards  to  Lisbon,  Seville,  and  Cadiz,  returning 
by  Lisbon  to  England  in  the  summer  of  1809.  They 
were  eager  for  the  success  of  the  Spanish  cause,  and  I 
joined  to  sympathy  for  Spain  a  boyish  hatred  of  Napo- 
leon, who  had  treacherously  obtained  possession  of  an 
independent  country  by  force  and  fraud  —  force  of  im- 
mense armies  —  fraud  of  the  lowest  kind. 

In  1810,  I  went  on  a  visit  to  my  brother,  Lord  Wil- 
liam Russell,  at  the  Isla  de  Leon.  He  then  served  on 
the  staff  of  Sir  Thomas  Graham,  who  was  gallantly 
defending  Cadiz  against  two  French  divisions. 

When  my  visit  was  over,  Colonel  James  Stanhope, 
who  likewise  was  on  the  staff  of  Sir  Thomas  Graham, 
proposed  to  me  to  go  with  liim  and  Colonel  Walpole 
to  the  head-quarters  of  Lord  Wellington,  who  had  just 
occupied  with  his  army  the  lines  of  Torres  Vedras. 

This  offer  I  joyfully  accepted,  and,  after  a  voyage 
to  Faro,  and  a  pleasant  journey  by  Almodovar,  we 
arrived  at  the  quarters  of  General  Hill. 

The  next  morning  we  rode  with  General  Hill  through 
the  small  town  of  Alhandra,  beyond  which  ahattia  were 
placed  to  stop  the  French  cavalry,  as  this  was  the 
farthest  English  post.  Indeed,  it  had  been  intended  to 
leave  Alhandra  to  the  French;  and  I  remember  that 
Lord  Grey,  whom  I  met  at  dinner  at  Holland  House  on 
my  return  to  England,  was  much  surprised  when  I  told 
him  that  I  had  ridden  through  the  place  within  a  fort- 
night. 

My  friends  and  I  proceeded  next  day  to  Pero  Nero, 
where  we  were  most  kindly  received  by  Lord  Welling- 
ton. We  were  furnished  with  bedsteads  thougli  not 
with  beds,  and  the  next  morning  before  daylight  we 
accompanied  our  general  to  the  fort  of  Sobral. 


LOED  WELLINGTON.  9 

Never  was  I  more  struck  than  with  the  physical, 
military,  and  political  spectacle  which  lay  before  me. 
Standing  on  the  highest  point,  and  looking  around  him 
on  every  side,  was  the  English  General,  his  eyes  bright 
and  searching  as  those  of  an  eagle,  his  countenance  fuU 
of  hope,  beaming  with  intelligence,  as  he  marked  with 
quick  perception  every  movement  of  troops  and  every 
change  of  circumstance  within  the  sweep  of  the  hori- 
zon. On  each  side  of  the  fort  of  Sobral  rose  the  en- 
trenchments of  the  Allies,  bristling  with  guns  and  alive 
with  the  troops  who  formed  the  garrison  of  this  forti- 
fied position.  Far  off,  on  the  left,  the  cliffs  rose  to  a 
moderate  elevation,  and  the  line  of  Torres  Vedras  was 
prominent  in  the  distance. 

Below  us,  over  a  large  extent  of  hill  and  valley, 
plain  and  eminence,  was  the  position  of  the  French 
army.  The  villages  were  full  of  their  soldiers ;  th« 
white  sails  of  the  Portuguese  windmills  were  actively 
in  motion  for  the  supply  of  flour  to  the  invading  army. 
There  stood  the  advanced  guard  of  the  conquering 
legions  of  France ;  here  was  the  living  barrier  of  Eng- 
land, Spain,  and  Portugal  prepared  to  stay  the  destruc- 
tive flood,  and  to  preserve  from  the  deluge  the  liberty 
and  independence  of  three  armed  nations.  The  sight 
filled  me  with  admiration,  with  confidence,  and  with 
hope. 

Impressed  with  these  sentiments  I  returned  to  Eng- 
land. Being  some  time  in  the  succeeding  autumn  at 
Lord  Grey's  at  Howick,  I  betted  a  guinea  with  his 
brother-in-law,  Lord  Ponsonby,  that  at  that  time  next 
year  Lord  Wellington  would  stiU  hold  the  lines  of 
Torres  Vedras.  Lord  Grey  thought  that  I  had  made  a 
foolish  bet,  and  referred  to  the  lines  of  Marshal  Villars, 
called  the  ne  plus  ultra  of  Marlborough,  and  which 


10  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

Marlborough  successfully  penetrated,  as  a  proof  that 
the  lines  could  not  be  held.  At  the  end  of  a  year  Lord 
Ponsonby  paid  me  my  bet. 

I  remember  that  in  the  year  1812,  being  at  dinner 
at  Lord  Wellington's  head-quarters,  he  called  to  Lord 
March  (afterwards  Duke  of  Richmond),  'What  are  you 
talking  of  at  that  end  of  the  table  ?  '  Lord  March : 
'  We  are  discussing,  sir,  the  question  whether  if  we 
went  back  to  the  lines  at  Torres  Vedras,  we  should 
again  be  able  to  hold  them.'  Lord  Wellington  said : 
'  That  may  be  a  political  question,  but  as  a  military 
question,  I  would  go  back  twenty  times  to  the  lines, 
and  be  confident  of  holding  them.'  I  saw  Lord  Wel- 
lington on  three  other  occasions  during  the  Peninsular 
War. 

The  second  was,  when  in  compan}^  with  my  cousin 
George  Bridgeman,  and  my  friend  Robert  Clive,  I  en- 
tered Spain  from  Oporto.  We  joined  the  army  at  the 
time  when  Lord  Wellington,  after  the  victory  of  Sala- 
manca and  the  capture  of  Madrid,  had  failed  in  his 
siege  of  the  castle  of  Burgos.  I  sat  next  to  him  at 
dinner  in  the  evening  when  he  had  made  up  his  mind 
to  retire,  and  to  withdraw  his  army  both  from  the  siege 
of  Burgos  and  the  occupation  of  Madrid.  I  knew 
nothing  of  this  important  and  mortifying  decision,  nor 
could  any  thing  less  prepare  me  for  it  than  the  conver- 
sation of  the  great  commander.  He  said  he  was  sorry 
he  could  not  show  me  the  castle  ;  talked  of  the  advance 
of  the  French  army,  of  which  I  had  been  a  witness,  as 
a  forte  reconnaissance,  and  laughed  at  the  luxury  of  a 
Highland  soldier,  who  had  piled  up  a  whole  tree  and 
set  it  in  a  blaze,  in  order  to  make  himself  a  comfortable 
fire-side.  The  rest  of  his  conversation  was  taken  up 
by  comic  descriptions  of  the  defects  of  liis  three  iron 


LORD  WELLINGTON.  11 

guns  —  Thunder,  Lightning,  and  Nelson  —  of  which  one 
had  a  severe  wound  in  the  mouth,  and  another  had 
lost  its  trunnions  by  the  fire  of  the  enemy.  After 
dinner,  my  companions  and  I  were  informed  by  Colonel 
Ponsonby  that  a  retreat  was  resolved  upon  for  that 
night,  and  we  were  advised  to  pack  ourselves  off  as 
quickly  as  we  could.  We  lost  no  time  in  following 
that  advice,  and,  for  my  part,  I  found  a  very  comfort- 
able bed  on  a  heap  of  chopped  straw  some  leagues 
from  Burgos.  We  tried  to  reach  Madrid  by  San  Ilde- 
fonso,  but  were  again  driven  back  by  the  French  ad- 
vance, and  forced  to  proceed  by  Salamanca  and  the 
Sierra  de  Gata  to  Badajoz,  Seville,  and  Cadiz. 

At  Cadiz,  during  the  winter,  I  met  Lord  Wellington 
when  he  paid  a  visit  to  that  town,  to  concert  with  the 
Government  and  the  Cortes  as  to  future  measures. 
Lord  Wellesley  had  been  urging  in  Parliament  the  ex- 
pediency of  sending  large  reinforcements  to  the  British 
Army  in  the  Peninsula,  but  Lord  WelHngton  did  not 
share  in  this  opinion.  He  related  at  some  length  the 
difficulties  encountered  in  transporting  two  regiments 
from  Lisbon  to  the  army  on  the  frontier  of  Portugal, 
and  observed  how  little  statesmen  at  home  knew  of 
these  difficulties,  in  the  emphatic  words,  'My  Lord 
Wellesley  does  not  know  all  this.'  Lord  Wellington 
was  no  less  solicitous  about  the  arrangements  to  be  made 
for  transporting  and  provisioning  the  army,  than  about 
the  military  operations  themselves.  Mr.  Bissett,  who 
acted  as  Chief  Commissary  during  the  absence  of  Mr. 
Kennedy,  told  me  that  on  the  day  of  the  battle  of 
Salamanca,  Lord  Wellington  sent  for  him.  He  found 
the  General  lying  on  his  camp-bed,  having  devoted  an 
hour  or  two  to  repose,  while  a  division  which  he  had 
sent  for,  to  take  part  in  the  battle,  was  coming  up  from 


12  BEC0LLECTI0N8  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

a  distance.  Mr.  Bissett  told  me  that  Lord  Wellington 
entered  with  the  greatest  detail  into  the  arrangements 
to  be  made  for  the  transport  and  supply  of  the  army 
with  provisions.  Thus,  on  the  eve  of  a  great  battle, 
Lord  Wellington  could  refresh  his  bodily  energies  by  a 
short  repose,  and  dictate  the  complicated  arrangements 
necessary  for  an  army  whose  means  of  transport  and 
whose  food  were  paid  for  and  not  extorted  by  force. 
While  he  did  so,  his  mind  was  undisturbed  by  the  im- 
mediate prospect  of  an  impending  battle,  in  which  his 
fame  and  his  life  were  to  be  exposed  to  a  hazard  which 
might  have  appalled  men  of  the  greatest  courage. 

In  the  autumn  of  1813,  I  again  saw  Lord  Wellington 
at  his  head-quarters  in  the  Pyrenees.  It  was  either  at 
Lesaca  or  at  Vera  that  I  was  for  a  day  at  the  British 
head-quarters.  I  could  not  but  feel  admiration  and 
joy  at  beholding  the  General  whom  I  had  visited  in  a 
critical  position,  defending  with  difficulty  the  capital  of 
Portugal,  now  advancing  in  command  of  an  admirable 
army  to  the  invasion  of  France.  The  same  coolness, 
the  same  imperturbal)le  judgment  in  the  midst  of  dan- 
ger, distinguislied  him  in  the  advance  as  had  marked 
his  prudent  defence  of  the  lines  of  Torres  Vedras. 
My  brother.  Lord  William  Russell,  who  was  on  his 
Bluff,  tf)ld  mo  that  on  one  occasion  a  single  division  of 
the  army  having  crossed  a  river.  Lord  Wellington  with 
a  few  officers  of  his  staff  likewise  crossed  with  a  view 
to  observe  the  enemy.  In  the  evening  the  river  was 
flooded,  and  it  swelled  with  such  rapidity  that  it  was 
impossible  to  pass  from  one  bank  to  the  other.  The 
officers  of  the  staff  showed  much  anxiety  lest  the  French 
should  take  advantage  of  the  dangerous  position  of  a 
single  division  of  the  army  and  overwhelm  General  and 
troops  with  their  superior  forces.    Lord  Wellington, 


LORD  WELLINGTON.  13 

alone,  remained  perfectly  calm,  and  never  betrayed  the 
slightest  symptom  of  uneasiness  or  anxiety.  Such  was, 
in  fact,  the  strength  of  mind  upon  which  the  whole 
British  Army  relied,  stronger  than  the  arms  they  bore, 
unconquerable  as  the  discipline  by  which  they  were 
united  and  controlled.  Thus  Ovid,  in  describing  Cad- 
mus when  about  to  encounter  the  Python,  says,  — 

telura  splendenti  lancea  ferro, 
Et  jaculum  ;  teloque  animus  prcestantior  ullo. 

Such  was  the  spirit  by  which,  at  the  end  of  this  great 
contest,  the  constancy,  courage,  and  perseverance  of  the 
British  people,  animating  the  prostrate  nations  of  the 
Continent,  at  length  achieved  a  triumph  over  the  most 
formidable  combination  of  military  genius,  warlike  popu- 
lation, conquering  armies,  and  political  talent,  which 
ever  threatened  the  independence  of  our  country. 

In  1814,  happening  to  be  with  my  father  at  Florence, 
I  found  there  was  an  opportunity  of  going  to  Elba  in 
a  brig  of  war,  and  I  eagerly  availed  myself  of  the 
occasion  to  have  an  interview  with  the  late  master 
of  Europe.  To  Lord  Ebrington  (afterwards  Lord 
Fortescue)  he  had  spoken  fully  of  his  past  life,  and  the 
accusations  which  history  might  bring  against  him,  but 
when  I  saw  him  he  was  in  evident  anxiety  respecting 
the  state  of  France,  and  his  chances  of  again  seizing 
the  crown  which  he  had  worn  for  ten  years.  I  was  so 
struck  with  his  restless  inquiry,  that  I  expressed  in  a 
letter  to  my  brother  in  England  my  conviction  that  he 
would  make  some  fresh  attempt  to  disturb  France  and 
govern  Europe. 

In  speaking  of  the  Duke  of  Wellington,  Napoleon 
said  it  was  a  mistake  to  send  him  as  Ambassador  to 
Paris :  — '  On  n'aime  pas  un  homme  par  qui  on  a  dt^ 
battu.' 


14  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

The  coalition  of  1815  and  the  Battle  of  Waterloo  put 
an  end  to  Napoleon *8  enterprise,  and  restored  peace  to 
Europe. 

I  have  pointed  out  what  I  conceive  to  have  been 
the  error  of  policy  of  the  Whig  party,  when  they  failed* 
to  see  that  the  war  of  1808  was  a  war  in  a  great  popu- 
lar struggle,  linked  closely  with  the  cause  of  the  inde- 
pendence of  Europe.  After  the  peace  of  1815  the 
Tory  party  committed  an  error  as  great,  and  still  more 
irretrievable. 

During  the  continuance  of  the  war,  men  readily 
listened  to  the  saying  of  Windham,  that  it  is  dangerous 
to  repair  our  house  in  the  hurricane  season,  and  thus 
Lord  Eldon,  Lord  Sidmouth,  and  other  bigoted  Tories 
were  permitted  to  leave  '  windows  which  shut  out  the 
light,  and  passages  that  led  to  nothing,'  in  the  Palace 
and  the  Parliament.  But  when  the  storm  was  over, 
men  would  naturally  survey  the  building,  repair  the 
crumbling  walls,  and  admit  the  excluded  rays  of  the 
sun.  A  wise  Ministry  would  have  studied  Mr.  Pitt's 
policy  from  1784  to  1792,  and  would  have  found  how 
little  ground  there  was  for  considering  him  as  an  enemy 
to  extended  commerce  and  religious  freedom. 

As,  liowever,  the  majority  of  the  ministers  preserved 
in  181G  the  attitude  their  great  leader  had  taken  in 
1793,  it  behooved  the  Whigs,  who  had  toasted  in  the 
worst  of  times  'The  cause  of  civil  and  religious  liberty 
all  over  the  world,'  to  come  forward  and  under  happier 
auspices  to  propose  the  reform  of  our  foreign  policy,  our 
financial  system,  our  commercial  exclusions,  our  intol- 
erant laws,  and  lastly  of  our  Parliamentry  represen- 
UUion. 

The  foreign  policy  of  our  Government  was  at  this 
time  a   timid    repudiation  of  all   those  doctrines  of 


FOREIGN  POLICY.  15 

national  liberty  and  independence  which  had  been 
Id  scribed  on  our  flag  at  the  end  of  the  war,  and  which 
had  led  Madame  de  Stael  to  declare  that  the  Tories  of 
England  were  the  Whigs  of  Europe. 

Our  financial  system  was  based  on  the  necessity  of 
keeping  up  a  Navy  and  Army  suited  to  our  high  posi- 
tion, and  of  paying  the  interest  of  a  debt  which,  having 
amounted  to  one  hundred  and  thirty  millions  before  the 
American  War,  had  risen  to  eight  hundred  and  thirtj- 
six  millions  at  the  death  of  George  III.  In  order  to 
defray  these  expenses,  the  taxation  of  the  country  had 
penetrated  to  every  corner  and  'cranny  of  an  English- 
man's life,  in  the  manner  described  with  so  much 
humor,  and  no  less  truth,  by  Sydney  Smith. 

With  the  same  object  of  collecting  a  large  revenue, 
and  also  of  promoting  native  industry,  prohibition  and 
protection  pervaded  our  commercial  code. 

No  Roman  Catholic  could  hold  high  civil  oJBfice,  or 
be  admitted  to  a  seat  in  Parliament.  No  Protestant 
dissenter  could  hold  any  official  position  without  nomi- 
nally, at  least,  submitting  to  what,  in  his  eyes,  were 
degradation  and  profanation. 

Last  of  all,  our  Parliamentary  representation  was  a 
mockery  and  a  scandal. 

But  I  must  explain  these  various  matters  of  grievance 
somewhat  further.  The  Treaty  of  Paris  had  replaced 
the  elder  Bourbons  on  the  throne  of  France,  and  the 
Congress  of  Vienna  had  divided  the  territories  of  Eu- 
rope among  the  Sovereigns  whose  arms  had  defeated 
Napoleon.  It  was  to  be  desired  at  that  time  that  the 
wishes  of  the  people  of  Europe  should  be  consulted 
both  in  the  choice  of  the  Sovereign  whom  they  were 
in  future  to  obey,  and  the  form  of  the  institutions  by 
which  they  were  thenceforth  to  be  ruled.     Both  these 


16  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

conditions  were  set  at  nought  by  the  armed  monarchs 
at  Vienna.  The  Belgians  wished  to  be  Belgian ;  they 
were  made  Dutch.  The  Lombards  wished  to  be 
Italian ;  they  were  made  Germans.  The  old  Republics 
of  Holland,  Genoa,  and  Venice  were  not  restored ;  the 
Prussians,  who  had  indulged  the  hope  of  having  a 
Constitution  granted  to  them,  were  not  gratified  ;  the 
charter  granted  to  the  French  people  by  Louis  XVIII. 
contained  ambiguous  phrases  by  which  Charles  X.  was 
enabled,  fifteen  years  afterwards,  to  assume  the  power 
of  dispensing  with  its  most  important  provisions. 

Lord  Castlereagh  was  not  to  blame  for  the  violation 
of  the  solemn  promises  which  the  military  rulers  of  Eu- 
rope had  made  to  the  people  of  Europe,  with  a  view  of 
obtaining  their  aid  against  Napoleon.  At  Chatillon 
Lord  Castlereagh  had  been  powerful ;  he  held  the  key 
of  the  strong-box  of  England,  and  could  dispense  at 
pleasure  million  after  million  of  treasure  to  the  coalesced 
Sovereigns.  Again,  in  1815,  ten  millions  of  pounds 
Bterling  had  been  granted  in  subsidies  to  the  German 
Princes,  and  Great  Britain  spent  about  a  hundred  and 
forty  millions  in  that  war  of  a  hundred  days.  But, 
after  Waterloo,  the  work  was  done,  and  the  statesman 
who  had  been  all-powerful  at  Chatillon  was  powerless 
at  Vienna.  He  tried  to  save  Poland  from  the  arms  of 
Russia,  and  he  assisted  Talleyrand  in  defending  Saxony 
against  the  ambition  of  Prussia.  But  neither  Russia 
nor  Prussia  required  any  more  subsidies;  immense 
armies  were  employed  to  watch  any  symptoms  of  re- 
gitttance,  and 

Ea«e  will  recant 
Vowi  made  In  pain  at  violent  and  void. 

Mr.  Canning,  as  Foreign  Secretar}%  might  have  done 
better,  but  he  had  unhappily  excluded   himself  from 


FOREIGN  POLICY.  17 

that  office,  and  was  content  with  a  useless  embassy  at 
the  Court  of  Lisbon. 

Thus  it  happened,  that  after  the  gigantic  efforts 
made  by  Spain,  by  Russia,  and  by  Germany,  the  Con- 
tinent lay  almost  as  much  enslaved  by  its  old,  and  for 
the  most  part  dull  Sovereigns,  as  it  had  been  since  the 
beginning  of  the  century  by  the  marvellous  genius  of 
Napoleon  and  his  victorious  legions;  only,  instead  of 
the  improvements  and  material  benefits  gained  by  the 
efforts  of  the  French  National  Assembly  of  1789,  the 
Continent  of  Europe  returned  to  the  old  feudal  laws 
and  corrupt  administration  of  the  despotic  monarchies 
of  Europe. 

Thus,  the  English  Government,  in  conquering  Napo- 
leon, and  quenching  the  flame  of  Jacobin  revolution, 
did  not  succeed  in  establishing  a  satisfactory  or  perma- 
nent settlement.  Pitt,  in  1805,  had  drawn  out  a  sketch 
of  a  restored  Europe,  such  as  he  wished  it  to  be,  should 
fortune  crown  the  arms  of  the  Powers  then  at  war  with 
France.  In  this  sketch  Belgium  was  given  to  Prussia. 
A  military  Power  of  that  magnitude  might  have  had  a 
chance  of  suppressing  a  Belgian  insurrection ;  but  the 
supremacy  of  Holland  was  sure  to  tempt  a  foreign 
people  to  resistance,  and  to  provoke  a  combat  in  which 
the  Belgians  might  meet  the  Dutch  on  equal  terms, 
and  thus  bring  on  European  intervention.  In  1830, 
such  an  insurrection  took  place,  and  nothing  but  the 
temperate  wisdom  of  the  then  ruler  of  France,  and  the 
judicious  firmness  of  Lord  Grey  and  Lord  Palmerston, 
prevented  a  European  war. 

Italy  could  only  be  coerced,  not  governed,  by  Aus- 
trian archdukes  and  Austrian  armies. 

The  treaty  by  which  France  was  given  over  to  the 
Bourbons,  and  liberty  kept  in  check  by  the  passive  sub- 

2 


18  RECOLLKCTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

mission  of  the  French,  was  attacked  by  Mr.  Homer  in 
a  most  able  argumentative  speech.  The  cause  of  the 
ancient  republic  of  Genoa,  and  of  the  old  public  law  of 
Europe,  was  pleaded  with  great  weight  of  reason  and 
authority  by  Sir  James  Mackintosh. 

But  a  question  touching  England  more  nearly  than 
the  state  of  the  Continent  was  now  to  be  submitted  to 
lier  Government,  her  Parliament,  and  her  people.  What 
was  to  be  thenceforward  her  honie  policy  ?  Before  the 
great  convulsions  of  France,  in  1785,  Mr.  Pitt  had  pro- 
posed parliamentary  reform,  not  indeed  as  Minister, 
but  with  all  the  weight  of  his  personal  talents.  In 
1786,  in  concluding  a  commercial  treaty  with  France, 
he  had  founded  his  measure  on  the  principles  of  free 
trade,  temperately  and  gradually  introduced.  In  1792, 
Pitt  and  Fox  had  lauded,  as  the  source  of  all  our  pros- 
perity and  all  our  greatness,  the  principles  of  the  British 
Constitution.  In  1801,  in  framing  the  measure  for  a 
legislative  Union  with  Ireland,  Pitt  had  proclaimed  as 
its  basis,  that  England,  Scotland,  and  Ireland  were  to 
be  placed  on  a  footing  of  equality.  He  contemplated 
the  admission  of  Roman  Catholics  to  seats  in  Parlia- 
ment, and,  with  few  exceptions,  to  all  civil  and  military 
employments.  He  projected  a  permanent  grant  to  the 
Roman  Catholic  clergy,  which  would  have  placed  them 
on  a  footing  of  virtual  equality  with  the  clergy  of  the 
Established  Church. 

In  1800,  the  Duke  of  Bedford,  then  Lord  Lieutenant, 
directed  Mr.  Ponsonby,  the  Chancellor,  Mr.  William 
Elliot,  the  Chief  Secretary,  and  Mr.  Grattan,  to  prepare 
a  measure  for  the  commutation  of  tithes.  They  pro- 
IK)8cd  to  give  the  Church  a  compensation  for  the  tithe 
of  agistment,  which  had  been  abolished,  without  any 
Tegaitl  to  justice,  by  the  Irish  Parliament.     The  plan 


STATE  OF  IRELAND.  19 

was  transmitted  to  England,  bnt  the  Ministry  soon 
after  resigned,  and  the  Government  which  succeeded 
them  was  not  prepared  to  do  justice,  either  to  the 
people  as  against  the  Church,  or  to  the  Church  as 
against  the  landlords.  Ireland  was  again  given  up  to 
that  monopolizing  minority,  who,  by  intolerance,  corrup- 
tion, and  oppression  kept  her  in  a  miserable  subjection. 

Any  one  who  will  read  the  descriptions  given  of 
Ireland  by  Burke,  by  Bishop  Doyle,  by  Grattan,  by 
Ponsonby,  and  by  Plunket,  before  the  Union,  will  find 
in  them  a  picture  of  *  a  country  ill-governed,  and  a 
government  ill-obeyed.'  ^  The  system  of  intolerance 
and  corruption  there  described  prevailed  from  the 
period  of  the  Union  till  1806,  and  from  1807  till  1830. 
Lord  Grey  then  undertook  the  double  task  of  putting 
down  sedition  and  inaugurating  justice. 

Questions  of  this  importance,  which  occupied  Pitt's 
mind  before  and  during  the  war,  were  thrust  aside 
by  the  imminent  perils  of  the  war  itself,  and  by  the 
necessity  of  combining  the  elements  of  a  majority  who 
might  agree  upon  the  policy  of  continuing  the  war, 
although  they  might  differ  upon  all  other  questions. 

Thus  Pitt  renounced  his  views  on  reform  of  Parlia- 
ment in  gratitude  to  the  supporters  who  had  opposed 
what  he  called  the  Jacobin  party ;  he  put  free  trade  in 
abeyance  in  order  to  raise  the  supplies  for  the  year; 
and,  after  a  temporary  retirement  from  office,  he  con- 
sented to  suspend  the  pacification  of  Ireland  in  def- 
erence to  the  King's  scruples  and  the  strong  religious 
prejudice  which  disturbed  hie  mind. 

But  now,  with  the  war  concluded,  a  very  large  debt 
contracted,  trade  embarrassed,  and  manufactures   de- 

1  Grattan. 


20  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

pressed,  these  questions  were  sure  to  arise.  Free  trade, 
parliamentary  reform,  pacification  of  Ireland,  might 
each  be  expected  to  excite  popular  discussion  and  par- 
liamentary movement. 

Had  Pitt  lived  till  1815,  he  might  have  recurred  to 
his  study  of  Adam  Smith,  and  promoted  freedom  of 
trade  with  foreign  countries ;  he  might  have  introduced 
a  temperate  reform  of  the  representation;  he  might 
have  pacified  Ireland  without  waiting  for  the  threat  of 
civil  war,  or  fearing  the  conscientious  scruples  of  the 
Prince  Regent.  For  the  Prince  Regent,  in  1812,  had 
empowered  Lord  Wellesley  to  form  a  Ministry  on  the 
basis  of  granting  what  was  called  *  Catholic  Emancipa- 
tion.* 

But  these  are  questions  belonging  to  t^e  hypothesis 
of  what  might  have  been;  my  task  is  to  record  what 
was  the  policy  of  the  Ministry  of  Lord  Liverpool. 

Lord  Liverpool,  of  whom  Lord  Melbourne  said  after 
his  resignation,  'that  he  had  been  clear  in  his  great 
office,*  had  the  merits  of  unblemished  character,  of 
great  fairness  in  debate,  and  of  avoiding  extremes  in 
policy.  Ho  was  a  man  of  very  moderate  understanding, 
not  averse  to  some  relaxations  in  matters  of  trade,  but 
utterly  averse  to  parliamentary  reform,  and  too  much 
imbued  with  the  prejudices  of  the  Tory  party  to  admit 
the  claims  of  Roman  Catholics  to  seats  in  Parliament 
or  political  office.  He  had  been  the  butt  of  Canning  at 
Oxford  ;  ho  was  his  master  in  Downing  Street.  Lord 
Gastlcreagh,  who  was  leader  of  the  Government  in  the 
House  of  Commons,  had  in  fact  the  superior  power  in 
domestic  as  well  as  in  foreign  affairs. 

Lord  Castlcrcagh  liad  entered  the  Irish  House  of 
Commons  early  in  life.  Ho  had  professed  opinions 
favomblo   to  parliamentary  reform.      But  having  re- 


LORD    CASTLEREAGH.  21 

ceived  from  the  Irish  Government  the  offer  of  the  higfh 
and  responsible  office  of  Chief  Secretary,  with  the 
lead  of  the  Irish  House  of  Commons,  he  accepted  it, 
and  became  the  exponent  of  the  policy  of  the  Govern- 
ment on  the  critical  questions  of  the  Rebellion  and  the 
Union.  Tiiere  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  insurrection 
was  suppressed  with  little  regard  to  humanity,  and  that 
the  Union  was  carried  by  means  of  political  corruption. 
But  Lord  Castlereagh,  while  he  obtained  the  praise  of 
Lord  Cornwallis  for  his  ability,  judgment,  and  habits  of 
business,  did  not  incur  any  peculiar  reproach  for  want 
of  feeling  or  want  of  integrit3\  After  the  Union  it 
was  proposed  to  him  to  lead  the  Irish  supporters  of 
Government  in  the  House  of  Commons.  But  he  de- 
clined this  separate  position,  and  chose  rather  to  be 
merged  in  the  general  body  of  the  ministerial  party 
than  to  be  the  leader  of  the  Irish  members.  He  did 
not  resign  with  Pitt ;  on  the  contrary,  he  held  an  im- 
portant office  in  the  Addington  administration.  Yet  he 
was  favorable  to  the  claims  of  the  Roman  Catholics, 
and  gave  them  his  support  as  soon  as  George  HI. 
ceased  to  have  personal  control  over  public  measures. 
It  is  said  that  many  years  afterwards,  when  Grattan's 
friends  were  assembled  round  his  sick-bed,  the  dying 
patriot  said  to  them,  '  Don't  be  hard  upon  Castlereagh 
—  he  loves  our  country.'  It  is  added  that  when  Lord 
Castlereagh  heard  of  these  words  of  his  great  opponent, 
he  burst  into  tears.  I  cannot  vouch  for  the  truth  of 
this  anecdote,  but  I  think  it  probably  authentic. 

Lord  Castlereagh,  who  had  been  often  pointed  out 
as  the  successor  of  Pitt,  wanted  the  large  views  of  that 
great  man.  Still  more  obviously  did  he  fail  in  emulat- 
ing the  magnificent  march  of  Pitt's  eloquence.  Lord 
Castlereagh  was  an  obscure  orator,  garnishing  his 
speeches   with   confused  metaphors.     He   took   three- 


22  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

quarters  of  an  hour  in  telling  the  House  of  Commons 
that  he  did  not  mean  to  make  any  motion  on  the  Trea- 
ties of  Vienna,  but  that  any  private  member  was  at 
liberty  to  do  so.  On  another  occasion,  he  had  gone 
on  for  an  hour  speaking  upon  what  subject  no  one 
could  guess,  when  of  a  sudden  he  exclaimed,  '  So  much, 
Mr.  Speaker,  for  the  law  of  nations.*  On  another 
occasion,  when  he  had  spoken  for  an  hour  tediously 
and  confusedly,  he  declared,  '  I  have  now  proved  that 
the  Tower  of  London  is  a  common-law  principle.*  Of 
Spain  he  declared,  that  '  the  pendulum  had  swung  so 
far  on  the  side  of  Jacobinism,  that  it  afterwards  swung 
quite  as  far  on  the  side  of  anti-Jacobinism,  which  had 
prevented  its  settling  in  a  middle  point.*  Every  one 
has  heard  of  his  exhortation  to  the  country  gentlemen 
not  to  turn  their  backs  upon  themselves.  He  is  said  to 
have  ended  one  of  his  long  orations  with  the  little  word 
'its.*  He  had  no  classical  quotation,  no  happ}^  illus- 
tration, no  historical  examples  with  which  to  adorn 
argument  and  enforce  conviction.  Yet  his  influence 
with  his  party  was  very  great,  and  he  was,  till  near  the 
close  of  his  life,  a  successful  leader  of  the  House  of 
Commons.   ' 

For  this  end  he  possessed,  besides  the  halo  of  glory 
encircling  liis  brow  as  the  Minister  who  had  successfully 
concluded  an  arduous  war,  very  consideral)le  advan- 
tages. He  was,  as  a  man  of  business,  clear,  diligent,  and 
decided.  His  temper  was  admirable  —  bold  and  calm, 
good-humored  and  dispassionate.  He  was  a  thorough 
gentleman ;  courteous,  jealous  of  his  own  honor,  but 
full  of  regard  for  the  feelings  of  othera.  No  one 
doubted  his  personal  integrity,  however  much  they  might 
dislike  his  policy.  That  policy  was  detestable.  None 
of  the  great  subjects  which  had  been  in  abeyance  during 
the  war  —  free  ti*ade,  parliamentaiy  reform,  the  griev- 


LORD  CASTLEREAGH.  23 

ances  of  Ireland  —  were  made  the  basis  of  ministerial 
measures.  The  Tory  party  dreaded  free  trade  doc- 
trines, as  likely  to  lead  to  the  subversion  of  the  corn- 
laws.  Mr.  Canning,  who  had  again  become  one  of  the 
Ministry,  was  a  vehement  opponent  of  parliamentary  re- 
form. On  a  motion  of  mine  to  disfranchise  Grampound, 
he  said  to  his  constituents  at  Liverpool,  '  In  disfranchising 
Grampound,  if  that  is  to  be  so,  I  mean  to  preserve  Old 
Sarum.'  With  respect  to  the  Catholic  question,  brought 
forward  in  1816  by  Mr.  Grattan,  Mr.  Peel,  then  Chief 
Secretary  of  the  Lord  Lieutenant,  made  a  powerful 
speech  on  the  argument,  that  if  the  higher  Catholics 
were  admitted  to  Parliament,  the  great  mass  of  the 
people  would  make  a  demand  —  an  irresistible  demand 
—  for  the  abolition  of  the  Protestant  Church.  Lord 
Castlereagh  and  Mr.  Canning  were  permitted  to  vote 
for  the  motion,  but  Lord  Liverpool  maintained  that  his 
Ministry  must  continue  divided  upon  a  question  vital 
to  the  empire ;  and  for  fourteen  years  after  the  peace 
this  perilous  and  discreditable  see-saw  continued. 

Even  upon  questions  of  social  progress  remote  from 
party  politics.  Lord  Castlereagh  resisted  innovation. 
Sir  Samuel  Romilly,  a  man  of  austere  virtue  and  the 
most  enlightened  humanity,  tried  to  amend  our  crimi- 
nal law ;  Lord  Castlereagh  obstructed,  and  successfully 
obstructed,  his  progress.  The  same  great  and  liberal 
man  proposed  to  make  freehold  property  subject  to  the 
payment  of  simple  contract  debts;  the  law-ofQcers  of 
the  Crown  would  not  hear  of  so  dangerous  an  innova- 
tion.^    So  with  regard  to  the  Slave  Trade  and  slavery ; 

1  One  of  the  Crown  lawyers  said  that  it  was  a  mistake  to  say  the  law 
dated  from  the  reign  of  Henry  VIII. ;  that  its  origin  was  as  far  back  as 
the  time  of  Edward  I.  'What  care  I,'  retorted  Romilly,  'whether  this 
law  was  made  by  one  set  of  barbarians  or  another  ?  * 


24  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

in  speaking  of  the  omission  of  Lord  Castlereagh  to  insist 
on  the  condition  that  France  should  not  revive  the 
SLave  Trade,  and  of  our  own  acquisition  of  new  col- 
onies, Sir  Samuel  exclaimed,  '  These  colonies  have  been 
bought  with  the  blood  of  Africa !  * 

His  look  of  stern  indignation  added  to  the  effect  of 
these  words.  Never  was  purer  integrity,  more  en- 
lightened philosophy,  or  a  more  profound  love  of  man- 
kind shown  in  the  application  of  political  science  to 
practical  legislation. 

The  conduct  of  the  Government  in  refusing  all  meas- 
ures of.  improvement  or  relief  amid  the  distress  which 
Boon  after  the  peace  befell  both  the  manufacturing  and 
the  agricultural  classes,  produced  its  natural  effects  — 
anger,  discontent,  disaffection,  and  secret  conspiracies. 
Lord  Sidmouth  had  recourse  to  the  usual  weapon  of 
arbitrary  government;  he  employed  spies  to  discover 
the  plans  of  the  conspirators,  and  the  spy,  as  usual, 
fomented  the  disaffection  which  he  was  sent  to  investi- 
gate. A  knot  of  disaffected  persons  in  Derbyshire  were 
told  by  the  spy  that  70,000  men  in  the  neighborhood 
of  Manchester  were  ready  to  rise  in  insurrection,  and 
some  of  these  unhappy  dupes  having  appeared  in  arms 
to  support  their  allies,  were,  on  the  evidence  of  the 
Crown,  condemned  and  executed. 

In  1817  the  Habeas  Corpus  Act  was  suspended  in 
England  ;  in  1819  six  bills  for  the  suppression  of  dis- 
turbance and  for  the  repression  of  discussion  at  public 
meetings  were  introduced  and  passed.  Lord  Castle- 
reagh, with  his  usual  boldness,  in  bringing  forward  his 
portion  of  the  bills,  said,  —  *  I  rise  for  the  purpose  of 
proposing  to  tlie  House  measures  of  severe  coercion.* 

It  was  evident  that,  if  such  was  to  be  the  peace 
policy  of  the  Government,  it  behooved  the  Opposition  to 


WHIG  OPPOSITION.  25 

declare  their  own  policy,  and  take  issue  on  their  pro- 
posals, as  contrasted  with  those  of  the  Government. 

The  Opposition  of  that  day  was  neither  a  strong  nor 
a  compact  body.  Except  Lord  Grey,  who  had,  much 
to  his  annoyance,  been  transferred  from  the  House  of 
Commons  to  the  House  of  Lords,  and  who  was  not  at 
this  time  very  active  in  political  life,  the  Opposition  had 
no  leader  fit  to  inaugurate  a  policy  or  to  lead  a  party. 
I  remember  being  summoned  to  a  meeting  of  the  mem- 
bers of  the  party,  both  in  Lords  and  Commons,  at  Bur- 
lington House,  early  in  the  year  1817.  Lord  Grey, 
in  a  few  clear,  bold,  and  dignified  sentences,  sketched 
the  policy  expected  from  the  Ministry,  and  his  own 
determination  to  oppose  to  the  uttermost  such  of  those 
measures  as  should  be  brought  forward  in  the  House 
of  Lords.  He  ended  by  sajdng,  '  Mr.  Ponsonby  will 
explain  to  you  what  is  expected  on  the  part  of  the 
Government  in  the  House  of  Commons.'  Mr.  Ponsonby 
then  addressed  the  meeting,  and  declared  that  he  knew 
nothing  of  the  proposals  to  be  made  by  the  Govern- 
ment in  the  House  of  Commons,  or  of  the  course  that 
it  was  fit  to  pursue. 

While  such  was  the  inability  of  the  leader  who  had 
been  set  over  us,  there  was  little  concord  as  to  the 
measures  to  be  resisted,  or  the  motions  to  be  brought 
forward  by  members  of  the  Opposition.  On  foreign 
policy,  little  was  to  be  done  at  this  time.  On  the 
question  of  retrenchment,  I  moved  in  1816,  by  the 
advice  of  Mr.  Tierney,  that  the  estimates  should  be 
returned  to  the  Government  w4th  a  prayer  for  their 
reduction.  This  motion  failing,  the  question  was 
taken  up  by  Mr.  Joseph  Hume,  who  had  great  knowl- 
edge of  details,  unblemished  honesty,  and  dogged 
perseverance. 


26  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

With  regard  to  parliamentary  reform,  as  I  took  the 
lead  upon  that  question  from  the  end  of  1819,  it  may 
be  as  well  to  explain  the  notions  prevailing  in  the  party. 
The  abuses  whi^h  had  existed  in  the  representation,  and 
■which  had  gone  on  increasing  ever  since  the  Revolution, 
had  from  time  to  time  excited  violent  bursts  of  indigna- 
tion, but  tlie  flame  of  reform,  after  blazing  fiercely  for 
a  while,  flickered  and  s.ank,  and  like  a  fire  of  straw  had 
burnt  itself  away. 

Impracticable  theories  or  weak  palliatives  had  been 
suggested  instead  of  a  wholesome  remedy.  The  Duke 
of  Uichraoud  and  Major  Cartwright  were  in  1780  the 
advocates  of  personal  suffrage.  Pitt  and  Fox  had  both 
professed  themselves  favorable  to  a  temperate  reform. 
But  the  majority  of  Pitt's  adherents  did  not  follow  him 
upon  this  subject,  and  on  the  Whig  side  while  Fox, 
Sheridan,  and  Grey  were  favorable  to  parliamentary 
reform.  Lord  Rockingham  and  Burke  were  opposed  to 
it.  With  these  traditions,  the  Whigs  of  1819  were 
much  divided  in  opinion,  many  dreading,  with  the  old 
Whigs  and  the  Grenvilles,  the  agitation  of  so  serious  a 
subject,  and  others,  left  to  their  own  inspirations,  pro- 
moting impracticable  schemes.  Lord  Milton  opposed 
refoim.    Lord  Althorp  and  Mr.  Brougham  supported  it. 

It  seemed  to  me  that  this  question  was  the  test  by 
which  the  popular  principles  of  the  Whigs,  and  of  the 
Liberal  party  in  general,  were  to  bo  tried.  As  a  ques- 
tion of  men,  I  could  not  understand  how  any  Ministry 
could  be  formed  with  a  fair  prospect  of  stability  while 
a  phalanx  of  membei's  for  close  boroughs  could  be  mar- 
shalled at  any  time,  and  drive  Liberal  statesmen  from 
oflice,  to  expiate  by  a  penance  of  ten  or  twenty  years 
Iho  crime  of  having  brought  forward  measures  favora- 
ble to  religious  liberty,  or  hostile  to  corrupt  expendi- 


THE  WHIG  OPPOSITION,  1819-1832.  27 

ture.  As  to  measures,  similar  reasoning  might  be 
applied  so  long  as  a  selfish  cabal  could  feel  certain  of 
defeating  any  plan  of  reform  injurious  to  their  personal 
interests.  There  was  no  hope,  therefore,  unless  parlia- 
mentary reform  were  seriously  taken  up  and  resolutely 
pursued,  of  arresting  the  course  of  political  repression, 
religious  intolerance,  and  wasteful  expenditure,  which 
was  upheld  by  all  the  strength  of  a  great  party,  victori- 
ous in  foreign  war,  fortified  by  the  possession  of  bor- 
oughs which  gave  a  majorit}^  in  the  House  of  Commons, 
and  apparently  invincible  from  long  possession  of  Gov- 
ernment patronage,  spreading  over  the  Church,  the 
law,  the  arm}^,  the  navy,  and  the  colonies. 

In  assailing  such  a  power,  it  behooved  the  Opposition 
to  be  very  cautious  ;  indeed,  I  had,  like  many  others, 
somewhat  of  a  superstitious  reverence  for  a  system 
which  seemed  entwined  with  our  liberties,  and  almost 
linked  with  the  succession  to  the  Crown.  There  was 
besides  the  danger  of  touching  public  credit,  which 
was  rightly  compared  by  Lord  Chatham  to  the  sensitive 
plant,  shrinking  from  the  slightest  contact  with  a  rude 
hand.  It  was  necessary  to  exorcise  what  Mr.  Bentham 
called  the  '  hobgoblin  argument,'  and  this  could  not  be 
done  by  bell  and  candle,  but  must  be  met  by  clear  argu- 
ment, and  dispelled  by  the  light  of  day. 

Such,  then,  was  the  problem  which  in  1819  I  had  to 
examine  and  consider. 

On  the  question  of  financial  economy,  I  am  con- 
vinced that  when  the  sums  proposed  in  the  yearly 
estimates  are  excessive,  and  show  profusion  or  care- 
lessness, the  motion  suggested  by  Mr.  Tiexney  in  1816 
is  the  proper  course  for  the  House  of  Commons  to 
adopt.  Mr.  Hume,  however,  Avith  indefatigable  indus- 
try and  perseverance,  in   1822,  and  following  years, 


28  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

attacked  the  various  items  of  expense,  and  succeeded 
in  persuading  the  country  that  the  general  character  of 
the  Government  was  not  marked  by  economy. 

The  motion  which  I  made  in  1816  produced  able 
speeches  in  debate,  but  no  adequate  result  on  the  divi- 
sion. 

In  fact,  the  men  of  property,  who  had  the  representa- 
tion in  their  hands,  still  feared  a  fresh  explosion  of  the 
French  Revolution,  and  were  disposed  to  trust  blindly 
to  those  who'  had  ended  the  war  with  glory,  and  re- 
placed the  Bourbons  on  the  throne  of  France. 

I  have  said  that  in  1817  the  Habeas  Corpus  Act  was 
suspended.  At  this  time  I  had  felt  attendance  in  the 
House  of  Commons  to  be  too  fatiguing  for  my  health, 
and  I  resolved  to  give  up  my  seat  in  Parliament  —  at 
least  for  a  year.  Before  doing  so,  I  opposed  the  Sus- 
pension Bill  in  the  speech  contained  in  the  volume  of 
my  speeches. 

I  was  returned  to  Parliament  in  1818  for  the  borough 
of  Tavistock,  and  in  1819  I  spoke  on  parliamentary 
reform. 

The  state  of  the  representation  of  the  people  in  the 
House  of  Commons,  which  in  1780  had  excited  so  much 
popular  discontent,  had  in  the  course  of  a  long  lapse  of 
time  become  more  and  more  unsatisfactory.  Successive 
Sovereigns  had  granted  the  right,  or  imposed  the  burden, 
of  returning  members  to  Parliament  on  the  corporations, 
freeholders,  or  burgage-tenants  of  numerous  small 
towns.  Powerful  peers  and  wealthy  commoners  had 
bought  property  in  these  small  boroughs  with  a  view  to 
increase  their  political  influence.  One  noble  lord  used 
to  go  out  liunling  followed  by  a  tail  of  six  or  seven 
members  of  Parliament  of  his  own  making.  Another, 
being  asked  who  should  be  returned  for  one  of  his 


PARLIAMENTARY  REFORM,  1819-1832.  29 

boroughs,  named  a  waiter  at  White's  Club ;  but  as  he 
did  not  know  the  man's  Christian  name,  the  election 
was  declared  void,  and  a  fresh  election  was  held,  when, 
the  name  having  been  ascertained,  the  waiter  was  duly 
elected.  The  object  of  the  boroughmongers,  as  they 
were  called,  was  generally  to  buy  up  the  freeholds  or 
burgage  tenures  in  a  small  borough,  in  order  to  reduce 
the  number  of  electors  to  a  manageable  number.  If  a 
freeholder  or  burgage-tenant  refused  to  sell,  it  was  not 
a  very  uncommon  practice  to  blow  up  his  house  with 
gunpowder,  and  thus  disfranchise  a  political  opponent. 

In  this  manner  a  number  of  boroughs,  called  nomi- 
nation boroughs,  were  created,  and  became  valuable 
property.  A  seat  for  the  whole  duration  of  a  Parlia- 
ment was  sold  for  5,000Z.  But  as  Parliaments  were 
subject  to  sudden  death,  prudent  men  made  a  bargain 
to  pay  1,000^.  a  year  so  long  as  they  sat  in  the  House 
of  Commons.  Mr.  Ricardo,  and  many  others,  were 
members  of  the  House  of  Commons  in  virtue  of  such 
payment.  Sir  Francis  Burdett  entered  Parliament  by 
purchase  of  a  seat  from  the  trustees  of  the  Duke  of 
Newcastle — a  minor.  Other  proprietors  of  boroughs 
sold  their  seats  to  the  Treasury  for  rank,  office,  or  pat- 
ronage. A  friend  of  mine  was  concerned  for  a  friend 
of  his  in  a  transaction  of  this  kind.  A  valuable  sinecure 
was  part  of  the  assets  to  be  allotted  to  the  seller  of  a 
portion  of  the  representation  of  the  people  —  I  think 
not  less  than  four  seats.  The  partial  remedies  applied 
from  time  to  time  by  Parliament  did  little  to  cure  a 
wide-spread  and  notorious  evil.  Shoreham,  where  rich 
nabobs  from  India  were  all-powerful,  and  where  a  club, 
called  the  Christian  Club,  sold  the  borough  and  divided 
the  profits,  was  thrown  into  the  Rape  of  Bramber. 
Lord  Chatham  expressed  his  satisfaction  that  Shoreham 


30  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

was  taken  away  from  Bengal  and  restored  to  the  county 
of  Sussex.    Similar  treatment  was  applied  to  Aylesbury. 

But  these  rare  punishments  were  ineffective  while 
the  general  system  was  so  corrupt. 

The  prevailing  notion  in  1780  was  tx)  diminish  the 
representation  of  the  boroughs  and  increase  that  of  the 
counties;  or,  at  all  events,  to  add  one  hundred  to  the 
representation  of  the  counties,  by  way,  as  it  were,  of 
diluting  the  noxious  ingredients.  Lord  Chatham  highly 
approved  of  this  remedy ;  but  Lord  North,  with  char- 
acteristic humor,  said  —  *  Some  ask,  with  Lear,  for  a 
hundred  knights;  and  some,  with  Goneril,  for  fifty;  but 
I  say,  with  Regan,  Avhat  need  of  one  ? ' 

It  was  clear  that  no  efficient  remedy  could  be  applied 
unless  by  means  of  a  strong  party  organization,  or  a 
strong  public  opinion  ;  and  both  were  then  wanting. 

In  1801,  Pitt,  in  his  speech  on  the  Union,  declared 
not  only  that  he  would  not  propose  reform  while  the 
war  required  the  undivided  energies  of  the  nation,  but 
that  the  resistance  to  Jacobinism  displayed  by  the  House 
of  Commons  during  the  French  War  persuaded  him  that 
no  reform  of  Parliament  was  necessary. 

Fox,  on  his  side,  induced  Grey  to  bring  forward 
reform  in  1797,  not  witli  a  liope  of  carrying  any  measure, 
but  as  a  protest  against  the  whole  foreign  and  domestic 
policy  of  the  Government.  Thus  reform  became  in  men's 
minds  closely  connected  with  revolutionary  change. 

Sir  Francis  Burdett,  in  later  years,  proposed  reform 
in  the  spirit  of  Bolingbroke  and  the  Tory  party  of  the 
reign  of  Queen  Anne.  Tlie  Tory  theory  of  that  time 
was,  that  the  House  of  Commons  ought  to  be  a  check 
upon  the  Crown,  but  that  no  Minister  ought  to  sit  in 
the  House  of  Commons.  The  Whig  theory,  which  was 
adopted  by  a  compromise  called  *  West^s  Expedient,' 


PARLIAMENTARY  REFORM,  1819-1832.  81 

from  the  name  of  its  proposer,  admitted  Ministers  into 
the  House  of  Commons,  if  duly  elected  after  the  accept- 
ance of  office,  and  instead  of  leaving  to  the  Sovereign 
the  free  choic6  of  his  political  servants,  insisted  that 
the  Ministry,  as  a  united  and  responsible  body,  should 
possess  the  confidence  of  the  House  of  Commons.  Sir 
Francis  Burdett,  reverting  to  the  notion  that  the  pre- 
rogative of  the  Crown,  in  choosing  its  servants,  ought 
to  be  unfettered  and  uncontrolled,  said,  in  bringing 
forward  a  motion  for  reform  of  Parliament,  '  If  a  coun- 
try gentleman  were  to  offer  to  a  servant  out  of  place  to 
make  him  his  butler,  and  the  man  were  to  answer,  "  I 
will  not  be  your  butler  unless  you  will  take  Harry  for 
your  coachman,  and  Thomas  for  your  groom,  and  Dick 
for  your  footman,"  the  gentleman  would  be  greatly 
astonished.'  This  remark  proves  that  Sir  Francis  Bur- 
dett was,  as  he  sometimes  avowed  himself  to  be,  a  high 
prerogative  Tory  of  the  days  of  Queen  Anne.  Indeed, 
this  mode  of  arguiilg  the  question  of  reform  was  an 
arraifrnment  of  the  whole  course  of  constitutional  ^ov- 
ernment,  as  it  had  existed  from  the  accession  of  the 
House  of  Hanover,  and  tended  to  no  practical  result. 
Yet  the  case  against  the  House  of  Commons,  as  an 
imperfect  and  distorted  image  of  the  people,  was  stronger 
than  ever.  On  the  one  side,  the  strength  of  the  nomi- 
nation system  was  such,  that  even  Mr.  Canning  felt  the 
weight  of  the  chain  he  was  unable  to  burst.  When  he 
was  going  to  India,  Mr.  George  Vernon  Harcourt, 
meeting  him  in  a  passage  of  the  Opera  House,  said  to 
him,  '  I  cannot  but  lament  your  going  to  India ;  I  was 
in  hopes  that  one  day  you  would  have  been  leader  of 
the  House  of  Commons.'  Mr.  Canning  answered  that 
at  one  time  he  had  entertained  a  similar  hope,  but  that 
when  he  saw  that  the  Ministry  were  obliged  to  yield  to 


82       RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

the  dictation  of  the  Duke  of and  the  Duke  of , 

he  no  longer  had  a  wish  to  be  leader. 

On  the  other  hand,  while  a  few  men  governed  the 
Government,  large  commercial  and  manufacturing  cities 
had  grown  up  which  had  no  representatives  in  Parlia- 
meni,  Mr.  Stuart  Wortley  conducted  all  the  local 
business  of  Yorkshire  —  of  Leeds,  Halifax,  Bradford, 
and  Sheffield  ;  Lord  Stanley  that  of  Lancashire  —  that 
is  of  Manchester,  Oldham,  and  other  populous  towns. 
On  public  affairs  these  great  centres  of  industry,  skill, 
intelligence,  and  wealth  had  no  representative  voice 
whatever. 

With  a  view  to  work  my  way  to  a  change,  not  by 
eloquence  —  for  I  had  none  —  but  by  patient  toil,  and  a 
plain  statement  of  facts,  I  brought  before  the  House  of 
Commons  the  case  of  Grampound.  I  obtained  an  in- 
quiry ;  and  with  the  assistance  of  Mr.  Charles  Wynn 
I  forced  the  solicitors  employed  in  bribery  to  reveal  the 
secrets  of  their  employers :  the  *  case  was  clear ;  the 
borough  was  convicted. 

At  this  time  Lord  Castlereagh,  who  had  always  been 
personally  very  kind  to  me,  invited  me  to  speak  to  him  on 
one  of  the  benches  behind  the  Treasury  Bench.  He  told 
me  that  the  Government  would  cordially  support  me,  if  I 
would  content  myself  with  extending  the  right  of  voting 
for  Grampound  to  the  neighboring  hundreds.  I  answered 
him  that  I  could  not  agree  to  that  proposal,  and  that  I 
must  persist  in  proposing  that  the  franchises  of  Gram- 
pound  should  be  transferred  to  the  town  of  Leeds. 
This  was,  in  fact,  the  whole  principle  at  issue  between 
the  Government  and  the  reformers.  The  hundreds  of 
Cornwall  represented  the  stationary  policy  of  the  Min- 
istry; Leeds,  the  new  population  which  I  sought  to 
admit,  and  with  tliem,  the  principle  of  reform.     When, 


PAELIAMENTARY  REFORM,  1819-1832.  33 

twelve  years  afterwards,  I  proposed  a  bill  of  reform,  on 
behalf  of  Lord  Grey  and  his  colleagues,  Mr.  Alexander 
Baring  said,  '  The  plan  takes  away  representation  from 
the  barley-field  and  gives  it  to  the  coal-field.'  This 
was  the  truth  in  1819,  as  in  1832.  My  proposal  took 
away  representation  from  the  dead  bones  of  a  former 
state  of  England,  and  gave  it  to  the  living  energy  and 
industry  of  the  England  of  the  nineteenth  century, 
with  its  steam-engines  and  its  factories ;  its  cotton  and 
woollen  cloths  ;  its  cutlery  and  its  coal-mines ;  its 
wealth  and  its  intelligence.  '  The  present  vindicated  its 
rights  ;  the  past  lost  its  privilege. 

But  to  return. 

After  a  long  conversation,  Lord  Castlereagh  per- 
sisted in  his  view  and  I  in  mine.  I  carried  my  bill 
in  the  House  of  Commons ;  but  when  it  went  to  the 
House  of  Lords,  the  town  of  Leeds  was  expunged,  and 
the  two  disposable  seats  were  given  to  the  county  of 
York.  Thus  the  introduction  of  new  representation 
was  avoided.  It  is  singular,  however,  that  the  Govern- 
ment of  1820  should  have  thought  that  by  excluding 
Leeds,  Manchester,  and  Birmingham  from  representa- 
tion, they  were  consulting  the  Conservative  interests  of 
the  Constitution !  Such,  however,  was  the  spirit  of 
the  Government  of  Liverpool  and  Castlereagh. 

After  the  disfranchisement  of  Grampound,  I  revolved 
in  my  mind  a  plan  for  the  reform  of  the  whole  state  of 
the  representation. 

In  meditating  upon  this  subject,  I  had  to  survey  not 
only  the  danger  of  shaking  an  edifice  which  resembled 
rather  a  strong  fortress  than  an  ordinary  dwelling- 
house,  but  also  party  objections  which  would  be  brought 
against  me. 

Mr.   Tierney  told  me  that  the  notes  to  members 

8 


84  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

usually  sent  out  when  a  party  motion  was  in  contem- 
plation, could  not  be  allowed  to  me  on  the  question  of 
reform.  An  old  and  powerful  Whig  member  of  Parlia- 
ment told  me  that  he  never  knew  the  question  of 
parliamentary  reform  brought  forward  without  doing 
harm  to  the  party.^ 

Thus  discountenanced  by  my  betters  and  my  elders, 
I  had  t6  consider  the  position,  the  character,  and  the 
principles  of  the  Whig  party. 

It  seemed  to  me  then,  as  it  does  now,  that  the  Whig 
party  had  from  the  Revolution  of  1688  endeavored  to 
accommodate  itself  to  the  wants  of  the  time,  without 
binding  itself  slavishly  to  precisely  the  same  course. 

In  the  reigns  of  William  III.  and  Queen  Anne,  the 
party  had  devoted  its  energies  to  wars  against  the  am- 
bition of  Louis  XIV.  That  contest  rendered  necessary 
the  exclusion  of  Roman  Catholics  from  all  those  vantage 
points  of  power  of  which  James  II.  had  availed  himself, 
to  subvert  the  liberties  of  Englishmen. 

During  the  reigns  of  George  I.  and  George  II.,  Wal- 
pole  had  confined  his  home  policy  to  the  single  point 
of  maintaining  the  House  of  Hanover  on  the  throne. 
When  asked  by  a  leading  dissenter  to  support  the  re- 
peal of  the  Corporation  and  Test  Acts,  he  urged  that 
the  time  was  inopportune.  The  dissenter,  ill-satisfied, 
wished  him  to  be  so  good  as  to  point  out  when  he  would 
support  such  a  measure.  The  Minister  said  he  would 
answer  in  one  word,  *  Never.'  ^  AValpole  was  probably 
as  litllo  inclined  as  any  man  to  favor  the  exclusion  of 
Protestant  dissenters,  or  the  enactment  of  harsh  penal 
laws  against  Roman  Catholics.     But  he  knew  that  if 


>  Lonl  George  Cavendish. 

«  See  Coxe'i  ♦  Life  of  Sir  R.  Walpole.' 


PARLIAMENTARY  REFORM,  1819-1832.  85 

he  favored  religious  liberty,  the  Church  would  rise 
against  him,  and  would  probably  overthrow  the  Prot- 
estant succession.  His  maxim  was,  therefore,  Quieta 
non  movere.  Lord  Chatham,  who  was  intrusted  with 
the  lead  of  the  House  gf  Commons  when  the  country 
had  drifted  into  war,  carried  on  that  war  so  gloriously, 
that  the  peace  of  1763  marked  the  ascendancy  of  Eng- 
land both  in  the  East  and  in  the  West.  After  this  time 
the  Whig  party  fell  into  a  state  of  decline,  and  for 
several  years  there  was  scarcely  a  perceptible  difference 
between  Whigs  and  Tories. 

The  American  War  and  the  debating  powers  of  Mr. 
Fox  led  to  a  revival  of  party  distinctions,  and  the 
new  Whigs  engaged  in  the  pursuit  of  objects  which 
the  old  Whigs  had  not  dreamt  of.  These  objects  may 
be  shortly  defined. 

1.  Not  to  interfere  in  the  internal  government  of 
ether  countries. 

2.  To  make  peace  with  our  American  colonies  by 
acknowledging  their  independence,  and  to  satisfy  the 
people  of  Ireland  by  conceding  their  demand  of  political 
equality. 

3.  To  promote  religious  liberty,  and  to  remove  the 
political  disabilities  affecting  Protestant  dissenters  and 
Roman  Catholics. 

4.  To  favor  parliamentary  reform  and  liberty  of  the 
press. 

Had  these  principles  prevailed  from  1770  to  1820, 
the  country  would  have  avoided  the  American  War 
and  the  first  French  Revolutionary  War,  the  rebellion 
in  Ireland  in  1798,  and  the  creation  of  three  or  four 
hundred  millions  of  National  Debt. 

Such  were  the  principles  which  Fox  and  those 
whom    Burke    afterwards    called    the   '  New   Wliigs ' 


86  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

professed.  They  had  been  powerful  in  argument,  but 
weak  in  numbers.  Both  the  American  and  the  French 
wars  had  the  support  of  the  great  majority  of  the 
country.  Sir  George  Savile  and  Sir  Gilbert  Elliot  are 
witnesses  to  this  preponderance  of  warlike  opinion 
during  the  American  War ;  Mr.  Fox  himself  and  his 
few  adherents  testify  to  the  warlike  temper  of  the 
majority  during  the  French  War. 

Among  these  adherents  were  my  uncle,  Francis, 
Duke  of  Bedford,  and  my  father,  who  succeeded  him. 

On  a  "visit  which  I  paid  to  Sir  James  Mackintosh, 
at  his  country  house,  he  said  to  me,  with  some  signifi- 
cance, 

Ecquid  in  antiquam  virtutem,  animosque  viriles, 
Et  pater  ^neas  et  avunculus  excitat  Hector  1 

He  urged  me  especially  to  undertake  the  question  of 
reform  of  Parliament. 

Thus  animated,  I  brought  forward  the  whole  ques- 
tion in  1822. 

My  friend  Mr.  Lambton  had  a  little  while  before 
made  a  motion  in  favor  of  reform.  But  his  plan  of 
electoral  districts  was  not  generally  approved,  and  a 
premature  division  put  an  early  stop  to  the  debate. 

That  carelessness  and  forgetfulness  which  are  so 
common  about  events  a  little  preceding  our  own  time« 
are  well  illustrated  by  a  passage  in  the  '  Quarterly 
lleview  '  of  January,  1869,  which  I  proceed  to  copy  :  — 
•  Any  thing  on  the  scale  of  Mr.  Pitt's  Reform  Bill  of 
'80,  or  Mr.  Grey's  of  '95,  never  entered  into  the  heads  of 
statesmen  as  a  practical  object  to  be  attained  from  the 
beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century  to  the  death  of 
Canning.  The  extreme  Radical  party,  led  by  Sir 
Francis  Burdett,  did,  in  1819,  move  for  something  of 
the  sort:  but  Lord  John  Russell  opposed  it  as  revolu- 


PARLIAMENTARY  REFORM,  1819-1832.  37 

tionary,  and  substituted  for  it  his  own  little  pop-gun 
against  Grampound.  From  that  time  to  1826  the 
Whigs  never  stirred  in  the  matter.'  The  inaccuracy  of 
this  statement  in  a  publication  which  professes  to  be 
the  organ  of  the  great  Tory  party  is  something  mar- 
vellous. In  the  first  place,  Mr.  Grey's  Reform  Bill 
was  brought  forward,  not  in  '95,  but  in  '93  and  '97. 
Admitting  this  to  be  a  slip  of  the  pen,  or  an  error  of 
the  press,  the  assertion  with  regard  to  my  exertions  in 
the  cause  of  reform  is  directly  opposed  to  the  fact. 

In  1822,  in  a  speech  of  three  hours  on  the  subject 
of  reform,  I  suggested  that  one  hundred  members  should 
be  added  to  the  House  of  Commons,  and  that  they  should 
be  chosen  by  the  larger  counties  and  the  great  com- 
mercial and  manufacturing  communities  of  the  king- 
dom. So  little  did  Mr.  Canning  consider  my  motion 
as  a  mere  pop-gun,  at  which  no  one  could  be  alarmed, 
that  he  gave  me  a  solemn  warning,  in  words  which, 
thus  challenged  by  the  Quarterly  Reviewer,  I  will  not 
refrain  from  copying  :  — '  Our  lot  is  happily  cast  in  the 
temperate  zone  of  freedom,  the  clime  best  suited  to  the 
development  of  the  moral  qualities  of  the  human  race, 
to  the  cultivation  of  their  faculties,  and  to  the  security 
as  well  as  the  improvement  of  their  virtues ;  a  clime 
not  exempt  indeed  from  variations  of  the  elements,  but 
variations  which  purify  while  they  agitate  the  atmos- 
phere that  we  breathe.  Let  us  be  sensible  of  the  ad- 
vantages which  it  is  our  happiness  to  qnjoy.  Let  us 
guard  with  pious  gratitude  the  flame  of  genuine  liberty, 
that  fire  from  heaven  of  which  our  Constitution  is  the 
holy  repository ;  and  let  us  not,  for  the  chance  of 
rendering  it  more  intense  and  more  radiant,  impair  its 
purity  or  hazard  its  extinction  !  The  noble  lord  is 
entitled  to  the  acknowledgments  of  the  House,  for  the 


88  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

candid,  able,  and  ingenuous  manner  in  which  he  has 
brought  forward  his  motion.  If,  in  the  remarks  which 
I  have  made  upon  it,  there  has  been  any  thing  which 
has  borne  the  appearance  of  disrespect  to  him,  I  hope 
he  will  acquit  me  of  having  so  intended  it..  That  the 
noble  lord  will  carry  his  motion  this  evening,  I  have  no 
fear  ;  but  with  the  talents  which  he  has  shown  himself 
to  possess,  and  with  (I  sincerely  hope)  a  long  and  bril- 
liant career  of  parliamentary  distinction  before  him,  he 
will,  no  doubt,  renew  his  efforts  hereafter.  Although 
I  presume  not  to  give  any  weight  to  observations  or 
warnings  of  mine,  yet  on  this,  probably  the  last  op- 
portunity I  shall  have  of  raising  my  voice  on  the  ques- 
tion of  parliamentary  reform,  while  I  conjure  the  House 
to  pause  before  it  consents  to  adopt  the  proposition  of 
the  noble  lord,  I  cannot  help  conjuring  the  noble  lord 
himself  to  pause  before  he  again  presses  it  upon  the 
country.  If,  however,  he  shall  persevere  —  and  if  his 
perseverance  shall  be  successful  —  and  if  the  result  of 
that  success  shall  be  such  as  I  cannot  help  apprehend- 
ing —  his  be  the  triumph  to  have  precipitated  those 
results  —  be  mine  the  consolation  that  to  the  utmost, 
and  the  latest  of  my  power,  I  have  opposed  them. 
(Loud  cheers.)'  ^ 

Mr.  Canning's  speech  was  eloquent  and  successful. 
But  his  peroration  showed  that  he  did  not  expect  that 
■  the  representation,  as  then  existing,  would  very  long 
endure.  And  my  friends  were  encouraged  not  only  by 
the  large  number  who  supported  me,  but  by  remarking 
that  among  those  who  appeared  in  the  division,  and 
who  had  never  voted  for  reform  before,  were  three 
members,  each  said  to  be   worth  a  million.     In   the 

^  Caunlng's  Speeches. 


PARLIAMENTARY  REFORM,  1819-1832.  39 

days  when  it  was  said  that  reform  threatened  propert}^ 
such  substantial  support  was  worth  a  great  deal. 

The  melancholy  death  of  Lord  Londonderry  (Lord 
Castlereagh)  produced  a  change,  at  first  gradual,  but 
afterwards  abrupt,  in  the  state  of  public  affairs.  Lord 
Liverpool  considered  Mr.  Canning  as  the  only  fit  suc- 
cessor, and  being  supported  by  the  Duke  of  Welling- 
ton, did  not  fail  to  obtain  the  reluctant  consent  of  the 
King.  The  transfer  of  power  from  a  man  of  business, 
endowed  with  common  sense  and  discretion,  but  bound 
by  traditional  Toryism,  to  a  man  of  genius,  a  brilliant 
orator,  and  a  no  less  shining  wit,  was  in  itself  a  novelty. 
But  the  change  was  far  greater  from  one  who  professed 
adherence  to  principles  of  non-intervention  with  the 
supremacy  of  the  Holy  Alliance,  and  who  spoke  coldly 
in  favor  of  Catholic  relief,  to  one  whose  impulses  were 
strongly  in  favor  of  freedom  abroad,  and  religious  lib- 
erty at  home.  The  expedition  to  Portugal,  and  the 
speeches  which  heralded  its  departure  from  our  shores, 
gave  assurance  to  the  Continent  that  the  arm  of  Eng- 
land was  yet  powerful.  The  eloquent  speeches  of 
Canning  in  favor  of  granting  the  petitions  of  the 
Roman  Catholics,  and  the  speeches  of  Huskisson  and 
Canning  in  favor  of  free  trade,  created  a  new  feeling 
in  the  country.  Neither  the  expedition  to  Portugal 
nor  the  measures  of  Mr.  Huskisson  with  regard  to  free 
trade  were  of  themselves  very  important.  But  every 
Liberal  felt  that 

Night's  candles  are  burnt  out,  and  jocund  Day 
Stands  tiptoe  on  the  misty  mountain  tops. 

Lord  Holland,  observing  the  cooling  zeal  of  the  Tory 
party  on  behalf  of  the  Government,  said  that  their 
feeling  was  like  that  of  Nisus :  — 

Absistamus,  ait,  nam  lux  inimica  propinquat. 


40  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

The  first  step  of  Canning  in  regard  to  the  French 
invasion  of  Spain  was  not,  and  could  not  be,  success- 
ful, but,  in  my  opinion,  was  not  open  to  censure.  I 
could  not,  therefore,  concur  in  the  motion  made  against 
it,  and  I  absented  myself  from  the  House  of  Commons 
on  that  occasion. 

The  substitution  of  Mr.  Peel  for  Lord  Sidmouth 
gave  the  country  a  ciiminal  law  reformer  and  a  friend 
of  free  trade,  in  place  of  a  Minister  who  was  the  incar- 
nation of  prejudice  and  intolerance.  Upon  one  great 
subject,  however,  no  advance  was  made.  In  1825,  a 
last  attempt  was  made  in  Parliament  to  settle  the 
Roman  Catholic  question  on  the  basis  originally  laid 
down  by  Pitt.  In  1805,  on  a  motion  made  by  Fox, 
Pitt  said :  — '  My  idea  was  not  to  apply  tests  to  the 
religious  tenets  of  the  Catholics,  but  tests  applicable  to 
what  was  the  source  and  foundation  of  the  evil;  to 
render  the  priests,  instead  of  making  them  the  instru- 
ments of  poisoning  the  minds  of  the  people,  dependent 
in  some  sort  upon  the  Government,  and  thus  links,  as 
it  were,  between  the  Government  and  the  people.'  ^ 

In  1825,  it  was  proposed  by  Lord  Francis  Egerton, 
*  That  it  is  expedient  that  a  provision  should  be  made 
by  law  towards  the  maintenance  of  the  secular  Roman 
Catholic  clergy,  exercising  religious  functions  in  Ire- 
land.'^  The  motion  was  carried  by  205  to  162.  It 
was  proposed  at  the  same  time  that  the  40«.  freeholders 
should  be  disfranchised.  These  two  measures  were 
called  the  wings.  They  would  have  settled  the  Cath- 
olic question  without  the  evil  and  the  reproach  of  yield- 
ing to  intimidation;  without  uprooting  the  Pix)testant 

t  Pltt'i  •  Speeches.'  vol.  111.  p.  424. 
'  llnnsorU,  vol.  xiii.  new  scrioa,  p.  818, 


ROMAN  CATHOLIC  QUESTION.  41 

Church  EstabHshment ;  civil,  political,  and  ecclesiastical 
equality  would  have  been  attained ;  peace  with  Ireland 
would  have  been  permanently  concluded.  The  Roman 
Catholic  clergy,  who  would  have  rejected  a  pecuniary  pro- 
vision taken  alone,  would  hardly  have  refused  it  as  part 
of  a  settlement  by  which  the  Roman  Catholic  laity  would 
have  been  admitted  to  Parliament  and  political  office. 

Lord  Liverpool,  a  man  of  honest  but  narrow  views, 
would  not  allow  this  civil  crown  to  be  placed  on  his 
brow.  He  told  Lord  Harrowby  that  he  would  not 
agree  to  the  words  '  by  law '  in  the  resolution  respect- 
ing the  provision  to  be  made  for  the  Roman  Catholic 
clergy.  He  said  to  Mr.  Arbuthnot,  '  Even  if  I  were  to 
give  way,  Peel  would  not.* 

Thus,  from  weakness,  from  the  want  of  a  directing 
mind  in  the  Ministry,  from  the  jealousy  of  Canning 
entertained  by  the  Tories,  and  from  some  personal 
feelings  on  the  part  both  of  Government  and  Opposi- 
tion, this  promising  scheme  fell  through ;  a  great  man 
was  wanting  in  the  Cabinet,  and  a  great  opportunity 
was  neglected  by  Parliament. 

In  1827,  Lord  Liverpool  was  disabled  by  a  fit,  which 
removed  him  from  office,  and  which  was  soon  followed 
by  death.  Thus  ended  a  Ministry  of  fifteen  years, 
marked  by  great  events,  but  not  by  the  predominance 
of  any  great  statesman. 

But  Lord  Liverpool's  disappearance  from  the  political 
scene  gave  rise  to  a  great  debacle.  The  fragments  of 
the  old  system  rushed  against  each  other,  and  for  a 
time  all  was  confusion. 

The  question  who  was  to  succeed  Lord  Liverpool 
in  the  King's  Council  gave  rise  to  much  conversation  in 
ministerial  circles,  and  to  some,  if  not  much,  intrigue 
in  the  cottage  where  George  IV.  resided  during  the 


42  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

rebuilding  of  Windsor  Castle.  What  passed  in  Parlia- 
ment, and  among  the  members  of  the  Liberal  party  in 
Parliament,  was  sufficiently  interesting  and  exciting. 

Canning  was  pointed  out  to  be  First  Minister  by  the 
usual  order  of  succession ;  by  thirty  years'  experience 
of  political  life,  begun  under  the  immediate  guidance 
of  Pitt ;  by  his  eloquence  and  his  genius ;  by  his  Lib- 
eral sympathies,  and  his  Conservative  tendencies  ;  by 
his  position  as  the  official  representative  of  the  Govern- 
ment in  the  House  of  Commons. 

Objections  both  political  and  personal  were  raised 
against  his  appointment.  The  intolerant  party,  who 
had  enjoyed  the  greater  share  of  patronage,  and  espe- 
cially of  ecclesiastical  patronage,  under  Lord  Liverpool, 
would  not  consent  to  the  transfer  of  bishoprics  and 
deaneries  to  men  who  might  be  favorable  to  the  grant 
of  equal  rights  and  privileges  to  Roman  Catholics. 
This  change  was  especially  distasteful  to  Mr.  Peel,  the 
Home  Secretary. 

But  there  were  likewise  objections  of  a  personal 
nature.  The  quarrel  with  Lord  Castlereagh  had  left 
disagreeable  impressions.  The  frankness  with  which 
Canning  had  urged  the  reasons  for  free  trade,  and  had 
told  men  who  objected  to  improvement,  because  it  was 
innovation,  that  if  they  persisted  they  might  have  to 
submit  to  innovations  which  were  no  improvement,  had 
offended  and  alarmed  the  real  Tories,  as  much  as  it  had 
attracted  and  conciliated  the  real  Whigs. 

The  apparent  objections  to  Canning  were  of  little 
weight.  If  the  Roman  Catholic  question  was  to  be 
treated  as  an  open  question  in  the  Cabinet,  it  was  ob- 
viously unfair  to  deny  to  a  pro-Catholic  leader  that 
supremacy  which  liad  been  long  and  quietly  yielded  to 
an  anti-Catholic  Prime   Minister.     The  quarrel  with 


CANNING.  43 

Lord  Castlereagli  was  owing  rather  to  the  weakness  of 
the  Duke  of  Portland  and  Lord  Camden  than  to  any 
fault  of  Canning.  It  was  no  wonder,  therefore,  that 
Canning  felt  deeply  the  wound  inflicted  upon  him, 
when  (upon  his  selection  for  the  post  of  Prime  Minis- 
ter) six  of  his  colleagues  sent  in  their  resignations.  In 
a  debate  upon  this  subject,  in  the  House  of  Commons, 
he  said :  '  My  position  is  not  that  of  gratified  ambition.' 
But  he  went  on  to  say  that  he  could  not  be  a  consent- 
ing party  to  his  'helotism.'  This  was,  in  fact,  the 
question  to  be  decided.  Canning,  with  all  his  powers 
of  debate,  his  experience  in  public  affairs,  his  conduct 
of  foreign  affairs,  which  had  raised  England  in  the 
scale  of  nations,  was  to  be  reduced  to  execute  the 
orders  of  some  man  evidently  his  inferior! 

He  justly  resented  these  resignations  as  a  proof  of 
want  of  confidence  on  the  part  of  his  Tory  colleagues, 
but  he  also,  from  his  excitable  nature,  felt  them  as 
personal  attacks :  and  when,  like  Burke,  he  saw  Blanche, 
Tray,  and  Sweetheart  all  barking  at  him  ;  the  clerks  and 
underlings  of  Lord  Liverpool's  Ministry  assailing  him 
from  every  quarter,  his  spirit  rose  to  meet  the  open 
attack,  but  his  heart  sank  under  the  secret  hostility  by 
which  it  was  prompted. 

With  the  alteration  of  one  word,  I  may  apply  to  him 
Dryden's  lines  on  Shaftesbury  — 

A  fiery  soul,  which,  working  out  its  way, 

Pretted  the  fragile  body  to  decay, 

And  o'er  informed  the  tenement  of  clay. 

In  the  conduct  of  affairs  he  had  not  preserved 
the  calm  and  cold  demeanor  of  Castlereagh.  When 
Brougham  attacked  him  for  his  tergiversation,  he  rose 
with  passion  to  repel  the  imputation.     When  an  anony- 


44  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

mous  pamphleteer  threatened  him  with  death,^  he  was 
so  imprudent  as  to  send  a  personal  challenge  to  the 
antagonist  whose  mask  was  worn  for  the  very  purpose 
of  evading  responsibility.  Thus  easily  exasperated, 
thwarted  in  his  foreign  policy  by  the  King  and  half  his 
colleagues,  holding  a  position  on  the  Catholic  question 
which  kept  Ireland  in  perpetual  ferment,  distrusted  by 
many  of  his  party,  and  prevented  by  his  opinions  on 
reform  from  cordially  uniting  with  the  Whigs,  it  is  no 
wonder  that  his  temper  and  health  gave  way.  I  re- 
member the  impression  made  upon  me  painfully  by  a 
single  word,  uttered  by  him  in  answer  to  a  question 
evidently  intended  to  vex  and  embarrass  him.  The 
resignation  of  all  the  anti-Catholic  members  of  the 
Government  placed  at  Mr.  Canning's  disposal  the  office 
of  Judge- Advocate.  There  was  some  delay  in  naming 
a  successor.  The  question  was  asked  whether  the  office 
had  been  filled  up.  The  answer  was  the  monosyllable 
*  Yes,'  but  pronounced  in  such  a  tone  of  mingled  scorn, 
anger,  and  grief,  that  it  seemed  as  if  the  heart  of  him 
who  uttered  it  were  breaking  with  vexation  and  dis- 
appointment. I  remember  nothing  like  it  but  Kean's 
answer  to  lago,  *  You  are  moved,*  when  he  replied, 
*Not  a  jot,'  in  a  voice  of  the  deepest  anxiety  and 
emotion. 

Lord  Lansdowne  and  Mr.  Tierney  joined  the  Cabinet 
of  Mr.  Canning.  Mr.  Tierney  stipulated  that  he  should 
be  free  to  vote  in  favor  of  parliamentary  reform.  Mr. 
Abercromby,  Mr.  Stanley  (the  late  Loixi  Derby),  and 
Mr.  Macdonald  accepted  office. 

The  new  pieces  were  not  very  well  dovetailed  into 

1  Trecentl  coi\jurnvlmu8  principes  juventutU  RomansB,  ut  te  in  hao 
tU  grMMTomur.  —  Livii  iliit.,  ii.  12. 


ORATORY.  45 

the  remains  of  the  Tory  Ministry,  but  the  importance 
of  the  change  thus  indicated  was  enormous.  The  Tory 
party,  which  had  survived  the  disasters  and  the  follies 
of  the  American  War,  which  had  borne  the  defeats  and 
achieved  the  final  glories  of  the  French  War,  was 
broken  by  its  separation  from  Mr.  Canning  into  frag- 
ments, which  could  not  easily  be  reunited. 

It  is  singular  to  observe  how  this  well-disciplined 
Tory  party  was  ready  to  break  forth  into  mutiny  when 
any  one  of  its  favorite  errors  or  rooted  prejudices  was 
abandoned.  Neither  the  eloquence,  nor  the  financial 
talents,  nor  the  experience  of  Pitt,  prevented  his  being 
left  with  only  fifty  followers,  when  the  King  refused  to 
conciliate  Ireland,  and  to  repair  injustice.  Neither  the 
brilliant  genius  nor  thirty  years  of  experience  saved 
Canning  from  desertion,  obloquy,  and  hatred.  The 
great  services  and  patriotic  disinterestedness  of  the 
Duke  of  Wellington  availed  him  little  when  he  pre- 
ferred the  pacification  of  Ireland  to  civil  war.  The 
eminent  qualities  of  Peel  did  not  protect  him  from  in- 
vective «,nd  vituperation  on  the  part  of  his  followers, 
when  he  proposed  to  free  from  taxation  the  daily  food 
of  the  laborer. 

The  period  from  1820  to  1827  was  the  most  brilliant 
period  for  oratory  in  the  House  of  Commons  within 
my  recollection.  The  graceful,  finished,  well-prepared 
speeches  of  Canning,  sparkling  with  classical  quotation, 
happy  illustration,  and  refined  wit,  were  delightful  to 
all  who  heard  him.  Sometimes,  indeed,  the  purpurei 
panni  did  not  well  combine  with  the  plain  broadcloth 
of  a  business  argument,  but,  on  the  whole,  the  effect 
was  entrancing  and  attractive  to  all  the  young  members, 
who  cared  rather  to  support  a  cause  well  defended  than 
to  examine   the   solidity  of    the   defences   themselves. 


46  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

Mr.  Ward,  himself  an  orator  of  no  mean  rank,  said 
once  to  me,  '  I  like  what  is  polished  and  perfect  —  I 
admire  Virgil,  Racine,  and  Pitt.'  To  such  men  the 
eloquence  of  Canning  was  irresistible.  Those  who 
above  all  admired  what  was  sublime,  though  not  fault- 
less, and  who  preferred  to  finished  poetry  and  elaborate 
oratory  Homer,  Dante,  Shakespeare,  and  Fox  were, 
however,  not  ready  to  yield  altogether  to  the  seduction 
of  a  statesman  who,  while  he  fought  for  Roman  Catholic 
relief  and  the  reduction  of  protective  duties,  contended 
for  restrictions  on  political  freedom,  and  utterly  opposed 
parliamentary  reform. 

On  one  occasion,  when  Canning  was  concluding  a 
speech  in  favor  of  coercion  he  deprecated  the  forth- 
coming reply  of  Brougham  by  the  quotation  — 

Stetimus  tela  aspera  contra, 

Contulimusque  manus;  experto  credite,  quantus 
In  clypeum  assurgat,  quo  turbine  torqueat  liastara. 

Brougham  well  earned  a  great  reputation.  With  pro- 
digious force  of  argument  he  struck  down  any  common 
adversary,  pouring  fiery  sarcasm,  and  unsparing,  over- 
whelming refutation  upon  his  head,  and  leaving  him  an 
object  of  ridicule  or  of  pity,  crushed  beneath  the  weight 
of  accumulated  epithets  and  a  burning  mass  of  invec- 
tive. 

The  third  whom  I  have  to  mention,  Plunket,  was,  in 
the  opinion  of  the  best  judges,  the  most  perfect  orator 
of  that  time.  Plunket  so  restrained  his  brilliant  fancy, 
that  it  was  ever  ready  to  help,  to  adorn,  to  illustrate, 
while  it  was  never  used  to  eclipse  or  encumber  his  argu- 
ment, lie  usually  confined  his  speeches  to  the  sul>ject 
of  Roman  Catholic  disabilities,  but  his  defence  of  his 
own  conduct,  in  answer  to  Mr.  Brownlow,  was  a  great 


triumpli  of  oratorical  art ;  and  his  answer  to  Brougham 
on  the  proposal  to  make  a  provision  for  the  Roman 
Catholic  clergy,  was  a  memorable  display  of  wit  and 
wisdom. 

On  the  Catholic  question,  while  Copley  and  Peel 
made  the  most  of  a  bad  cause,  the  union  of  Plunket, 
Brougham,  and  Canning,  in  defence  of  justice  to  Ire- 
land, produced  three  speeches  in  different  styles,  une- 
qualled in  power  to  convince,  combining  the  eloquence 
of  great  orators  with  the  counsels  of  wise  statesmen. 

This  brilliant  period  was  about  to  terminate.  Can- 
ning died  in  1827  at  Chiswick,  where  Fox  had  died  in 
1806.  Plunket  accepted  a  seat  in  the  House  of  Lords  ; 
Brougham  remained  only  three  years  longer  in  the 
House  of  Commons.  But  the  fire  which  these  three 
men  had  kindled  blazed  on  for  many  years  after  their 
disappearance.  After  a  short  period  of  official  rule, 
Lord  Goderich,  First  Lord  of  the  Treasury,  who  had 
taken  no  means  to  strengthen  his  Government,  resigned, 
and  the  King  sent  for  the  Duke  of  Wellington,  who 
retained  the  Canning  portion  of  the  Cabinet,  and  got 
rid  of  the  Whig  members  of  the  Ministry.  Mr.  Tier- 
ney  said  he  had  been  killed  in  a  chance-medley. 

Mr.  Peel  was  the  new  leader  of  the  House  of  Com- 
mons. 

In  1828,  at  the  request  of  a  body  of  Protestant  dis- 
senters, I  brought  forward  a  motion  for  the  repeal  of 
the  Corporation  and  Test  Acts,  and  to  my  great  surprise 
carried  it  by  a  majority  of  forty. 

Peel,  finding  himself  defeated,  after  a  vain  attempt 
to  avoid  a  total  repeal,  proposed  a  useless  and  feeble 
declaration,  which  the  Bishops  accepted  in  the  House 
of  Lords,  after  adding  a  mischievous  barrier  against  the 
admission  of  the  Jews,  in  the  words  '  on  the  true  faith 


48       KECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 


# 


of  a  Christian.'  The  whole  of  this  declaration  was 
repealed  in  1868 ;  it  had  kept  out  nobody,  and  its  re- 
moval will  admit  nobody. 

Huskisson  and  the  friends  of  Canning  voted  against 
the  repeal  of  the  Corporation  and  Test  Acts. 

The  successive  steps  which  brought  on  the  Roman 
Catholic  Relief  Bill  are  to  be  found  in  Sir  Robert  Peel's 
Memorandum  upon  this  subject.  It  has  always  seemed 
to  me,  that,  however  pure  his  motives,  and  however 
clear  his  integrity,  he  would  have  done  better,  both  for 
himself  and  his  country,  if  he  had  resigned  office,  and 
given  his  support,  either  to  the  Duke  of  Wellington 
with  another  leader  in  the  Commons,  or  to  Lord  Grey 
and  the  Whig  party,  in  the  settlement  of  a  question 
wliich,  since  the  peace,  had  been  the  apparent  cause  of 
their  proscription. 

The  only  reason  alleged  in  the  Memorandum  alluded 
to,  is  the  King's  personal  dislike  of  Lord  Grey.  But 
this  dislike  was  not  so  strong  as  that  which  his  father 
entertained  to  Mr.  Fox.  Fox  had,  notwithstanding  this 
dislike,  when  an  emergenc}'^  arose,  been  admitted  to  the 
councils  of  the  King,  and  when  he  died,  George  IIL 
said  to  his  daughter,  the  Duchess  of  Gloucester,  who 
told  it  to  me,  'I  did  not  think  I  should  ever  have  re- 
gretted the  death  of  Mr.  Fox,  as  I  find  I  do.'  But 
George  IIL's  religious  scruples,  and  even  his  personal 
prejudices,  were  respected  by  the  nation,  and  formed 
real  banders  so  long  as  he  did  not  himself  waive  them ; 
the  religious  scruples  of  George  IV.  did  not  meet  with 
ready  belief,  nor  did  his  personal  dislikes  inspire  national 
respect  or  obtain  national  acquiescence. 

However,  as  Mr.  Peel  had  thought  it  his  duty  to  re- 
main in  office,  the  Whig  party  determined  to  give  him 
a  cordial  support.     I  was  present  at  a  small  meeting 


ROMAN  CATHOLIC  QUESTION.  49 

of  the  leaders  of  the  party,  at  Sir  Francis  Burdett's, 
when  Lord  Althorp  was  authorized  to  communicate  to 
Peel  our  objections  to  part  of  the  ministerial  measures. 
But  when  Lord  Althorp  reported  to  us  the  answer  of 
Peel,  that  the  Ministers  could  not  go  further  than  they 
had  done,  we  all  acquiesced,  and  waived  every  objection, 
in  order  to  give  a  thorough  support  to  the  Government 
which  had  undertaken  this  mighty  task. 

One  of  the  shrewdest  of  the  Tory  party,  who  after- 
wards held  a  Cabinet  office,  is  reported  to  have  ob- 
served that  he  should  not  have  felt  so  much  objection 
to  Catholic  emancipation,  had  he  not  felt  sure  that  it 
would  be  followed  by  reform  of  Parliament, 

He  was  not  mistaken.  The  Catholic  question  having 
been  moved  out  of  the  way,  attention  was  more  eagerly 
directed  to  the  faults  of  the  existing  state  of  the  repre- 
sentation of  the  people. 

Standing  one  day  at  the  bar  of  the  House  of  Com- 
mons, in  the  year  1830,  I  showed  Mr.  Huskisson  some 
resolutions  on  parliamentary  reform  which  I  intended 
to  move.  Huskisson  said :  '  I  cannot  vote  for  these 
resolutions,  but  something  to  this  effect  will  be  carried 
before  long.' 

The  events  which  immediately  preceded  the  General 
Election  of  1830  had  prepared  the  way  for  the  fall  of 
that  Tory  supremacy  which  had  for  sixty  years,  with 
little  interruption,  ruled  England ;  had  carried  on  the 
American  War  and  the  French  Revolutionary  War,  and 
had  placed  the  country  in  a  position  of  immense  power, 
enormous  debt,  and  great  internal  difficulty. 

The  sudden  change  of  the  Duke  of  Wellington  and 
Sir  Robert  Peel  on  the  policy  to  be  pursued  towards 
Ireland,  had  struck  men  with  astonishment  and  inspired 
them  with  distrust.     That  the  same  man  who  in  1827 

4 


50  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

had  declared,  with  six  of  his  colleagues,  that  not  only 
could  he  not  consent  to  admit  the  Catholics  to  Parlia- 
ment and  to  high  office,  but  that  he  could  not  even 
submit  to  serve  as  Secretary  of  State  under  a  Prime 
Minister  who  was  favorable  to  their  claims,  should, 
two  yeai-s  afterwards,  have  come  forward,  and,  in  a 
speech  of  great  length  and  ability,  have  recommended 
concession  on  all  those  points,  without  conditions  and 
without  security,  produced  a  very  natural  and  very 
general  distrust.  '  If,'  they  said,  '  Peel,  while  he  was 
opposing  Canning  in  1827,  knew  that  concession  must 
be  the  end  of  his  policy,  what  becomes  of  his  honesty  ? 
If  such  was  to  be  the  inevitable  termination,  why  should 
he  not  rather,  even  out  of  office,  have  assisted  Canning, 
who,  by  his  genius,  by  his  eloquence,  and  by  his  great 
reputation,  was  entitled  to  that  assistance,  rather  than 
have  proclaimed  a  continued  and  determined  resistance 
to  claims  which  he  then  declared  to  be  inconsistent  with 
our  political  Constitution  and  our  religious  Establish- 
ment? But  if,  in  1827,  Peel  hoped  to  resist  success- 
fully all  further  concessions  to  Roman  Catholics,  and  in 
1829  perceived  that  it  required  only  a  continuance  of 
the  balanced  state  of  the  House  of  Commons,  and  the 
agitation  of  a  skilful  demagogue  in  Ireland,  to  make  the 
defence  of  all  those  buttresses  which  he  had  so  long 
and  so  pertinaciously  defended,  hopeless,  where  was  his 
wisdom  ?  '  In  fact,  the  whole  framework  of  our  repre- 
sentation, the  whole  machinery  of  government  by  which 
Loixl  North,  Mr.  Pitt,  and  Lord  Liverpool  had  ruled, 
seemed  to  be  tumbling  into  ruins  after  this  great  politi- 
cal earthquake. 

Few  men  saw  justly  and  clearly  the  consequences  at 
home  of  the  couree  pursued  by  the  Duke  of  Wellington 
abroad.   The  Revolution  in  France,  overthrowing  Legit- 


FALL  OF  TOKY  MINISTRY.  51 

imacy,  and  crowning  a  monarchy  founded  upon  popular 
resistance ;  the  excitement  of  a  General  Election,  and 
the  accession  of  a  new  Sovereign ;  the  internal  state  of 
the  country,  resulting  from  long  mismanagement;  all 
contributed  to  bring  about,  on  the  one  side  a  desire  of 
change,  and  on  the  other  discouragement  and  despond- 
ency. 

When,  therefore,  at  the  meeting  of  Parliament,  No- 
vember the  3d,  the  Duke  of  Wellington  declared  that 
the  constitution  of  the  House  of  Commons  was  perfect, 
and  that  the  wit  of  man  could  not  a  priori  have  devised 
any  thing  so  good,  the  general  feeling  was  one  of  dis- 
may. The  House  of  Lords,  usually  so  calm,  showed 
signs  of  amazement  and  perturbation.  The  Duke  whis- 
pered to  one  of  his  colleagues,  '  What  can  I  have  said 
which  seems  to  make  so  great  a  disturbance  ?  '  '  You 
have  announced  the  fall  of  your  Government,  that  is 
all,'  replied  his  more  clear-sighted  colleague. 

Accordingly,  when  Sir  Henry  Parnell,  in  the  House 
of  Commons,  moved  an  amendment  respecting  the  ap- 
pointment of  a  Committee  on  the  Civil  List,  which  Mr. 
Tierney  had  frequently  brought  forward  unsuccessfully, 
it  was  carried  by  a  majority  of  upwards  of  thirty.  Al- 
though, in  ordinary  times,  this  victory  of  the  Opposition 
would  have  been  of  little  consequence,  it  was  now 
thought  so  serious,  that  Mr.  Peel  went  at  once  to  the 
Duke  of  Wellington,  at  Apsley  House,  to  declare  he 
could  no  longer  remain  in  office  ;  the  following  day  the 
whole  Ministry  resigned.  Lord  Gre}^  was  sent  for  by 
the  King,  and  desired  by  his  Majesty  to  form  an  ad- 
ministration. 

At  this  period  the  situation  of  affairs  at  home  was 
very  critical.  The  fifteen  years  which  had  elapsed 
since  the  peace  had  not  been  employed  to  good  pur- 


52  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

pose;  the  currency,  indeed,  had  been  restored  to  its 
old  value,  and  the  guinea  no  longer  represented  more 
than  the  twenty-one  shillings  which  it  professed  to  be 
worth ;  but,  generally  speaking,  old  abuses  which  had 
been  left  uncorrected  during  the  pressure  of  war  had 
been  still  uncorrected  during  the  leisure  of  peace,  and 
the  new  abuses  which  had  arisen  in  times  of  scarcity, 
and  at  periods  of  emergency,  had  been  allowed  to  grow 
up  in  rank  luxuriance,  till  they  overspread  the  land. 
Among  these  abuses,  there  was  none  more  contrary  to 
sound  principle,  none  more  destructive  to  the  peace  and 
prosperity  of  the  country,  than  the  perversion  of  the 
Poor-law  of  Elizabeth.  During  the  years  of  scarcity 
which  had  afflicted  the  country  at  the  end  of  the  last 
and  the  beginning  of  the  present  century,  the  poor  had 
suffered  grievously  from  the  great  rise  in  the  price  of 
provisions,  unaccompanied  by  a  similar  rise  in  the  rate 
of  wages.  It  occurred  to  some  not  very  wise  country 
gentlemen,  that  the  laborers  might  be  enabled  to  main- 
tain themselves  and  their  families,  without  putting  their 
employers  to  the  expense  which  a  general  rise  in  the 
rate  of  wages  would  involve.  They  accordingly  framed 
a  scale  :  so  much  to  an  unmarried  laborer ;  so  much  to 
a  married  laborer  with  one  child ;  so  much  to  a  married 
laborer  with  two  children  ;  and  so  on,  till  the  allowance 
given  to  a  laborer  with  ten  or  twelve  children  was 
equivalent  to  a  very  high  rate  of  wages.  In  the  course 
of  ycare,  this  foolish  scheme  produced  the  evils  that 
might  have  been  expected.  The  individual  laborer  was 
no  longer  paid  according  to  the  value  of  his  strength 
and  skill  as  a  laborer,  but  according  to  the  number  of 
his  family,  without  reference  to  the  work  he  might  per- 
form. The  population  of  a  parish  increased,  not  in 
proportion  to  the  demand  for  labor,  but  in  proportion  to 


POOR  LAWS.  53 

the  readiness  of  farm  laborers  to  take  advantage  of  the 
perverted  law  to  marry,  and  live  on  the  public  as  parish 
pensioners.  The  mischiefs  produced  by  this  system  in 
the  agricultural  counties  were  extensive  and  appalling. 
In  Buckinghamshire  whole  parishes  were  pauperized, 
and  farmers  abandoned  tillage  rather  than  attempt  to 
pay  a  rate  of  nineteen  or  twenty  shillings  in  the  pound. 
A  farmer  in  Huntingdonshire,  giving  evidence  before  a 
Committee  of  the  House  of  Commons,  over  which  I 
presided,  stated  that  the  young  laborers  said  to  the 
members  of  the  vestry,  '  We  will  marry,  and  you  must 
maintain  us.'  In  Bedfordshire,  a  state  of  society  ex- 
isted, which  is  portrayed  with  much  fidelity  in  a  petition 
presented  to  the  House  of  Commons  in  1830.  In  the 
agricultural  parishes,  gangs  of  forty  or  fifty  laborers  out 
of  employment  were  sent  nominally  to  repair  the  roads, 
but  in  fact  loitered  all  day  by  the  side  of  their  wheel- 
barrows, and  passed  the  night  in  poaching,  and  spend- 
ing the  fruits  of  their  plunder  in  the  public-houses.  In 
the  parish  of  Woburn,  where  there  were  forty  of  these 
able-bodied  laborers  unemployed,  I  asked  a  farmer  why 
he  did  not  give  wages  to  two  or  three  of  them  in  return 
for  work  upon  his  farm.  He  answered,  '  They  would 
do  me  no  good  ;  they  would  be  more  likely  to  steal  what 
I  have  than  to  do  any  work  on  the  farm.'  In  the  west- 
ern counties,  large  bodies  of  these  idle  young  men  went 
about  destroying  thrashing-machines,  and  setting  fire  to 
ricks  of  hay  and  stacks  of  corn.  At  night,  the  whole 
atmosphere  was  lighted  up  by  fires,  the  work  of  lawless 
depredators.  The  yeomanry  were  called  out  and  capt- 
ured many  offenders,  but  still  the  evil  went  on.  Farm- 
ers were  alarmed  for  their  property,  members  of  parish 
vestries  were  afraid  to  refuse  the  demands  of  sturdy 


54  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

beggars,  and  the  whole  framework  of  society  seemed 
about  to  yield  to  force  and  anarchy.  Sir  Robert  Peel, 
the  Home  Secretary,  confessed  that  he  had  no  remedy 
to  propose  for  this  diseased  condition. 

The  state  of  the  metropolis  was  not  better  than  that 
of  the  rural  districts.  The  King  was  advised  not  to 
pay  that  visit  to  the  city  which  is  customary  upon  the 
accession  of  a  Sovereign,  lest  his  presence  should  excite 
tumult  and  disorder.  A  tradesman  in  Westminster, 
being  asked  why  he  had  provided  himself  with  a  mus- 
ket, answered,  '  In  the  first  place  to  get  reform  of  Par- 
liament, and  in  the  next  place  to  defend  my  house 
against  a  mob.*  A  certain  vague  desire,  and  a  fear 
equally  undefined,  seemed  to  possess  all  classes  of  men. 
The  events  of  the  three  glorious  days  of  Paris  had  filled 
the  mind  of  England  with  a  notion  that  the  public  good 
was  to  be  sought  by  revolution,  by  barricades  in  the 
streets,  and  by  force  employed  to  obtain  popular  meas- 
ures. But  of  what  nature,  to  what  extent  to  be  carried, 
or  what  were  the  precise  benefits  to  be  attained  by  these 
measures,  no  one  well  knew.  It  was  therefore  the  task 
of  the  new  Government  to  frame  measures  large  enough 
to  satisfy  expectation,  and  at  the  same  time  to  maintain 
the  dignity  of  the  monarchy  and  the  authority  of  Par- 
liament. 

The  aspect  of  affairs  abroad  was  at  the  same  time 
disquieting.  The  weak  and  unnatural  connection  which 
the  treaties  of  1815  had  formed  between  Holland  and 
Belgium  had,  after  many  years  of  jealousy  and  discon- 
tent, ended  in  a  general  insurrection  of  the  Belgium 
people.  A  proclamation  beginning  *  To  arms  I  to  arms  I ' 
had  been  signed  by  men  of  the  first  rank  and  ability  as 
leaders  of  the  insurgent  party.    It  was  to  be  feared 


MINISTRY  OF  LORD   GREY.  55 

that  the  French  appetite  for  annexation,  which  had 
been  indulged  by  the  Jacobin  Republic  of  1792,  might 
revive  under  the  excitement  of  a  recent  revolution,  and 
the  sympathies  of  the  popular  party.  The  great  Powers 
had  already  communicated  to  each  other  their  anxieties 
upon  this  subject,  and  a  conference  under  the  auspices 
of  Lord  Aberdeen  had  been  assembled  in  London. 

It  was  in  this  state  of  affairs  that  Lord  Grey  was 
called  to  the  councils  of  his  Sovereign,  and,  happily, 
his  abilities  and  his  experience  were  found  equal  to  the 
emergency. 

Lord  Grey  determined  to  construct  his  administra- 
tion upon  a  broad  and  comprehensive  basis.  He  in- 
vited Lord  Goderich,  Lord  Palmerston,  and  Mr.  Charles 
Grant,  who  had  been  members  of  Mr.  Canning's  Min- 
istvj,  to  accept  offices  in  the  Cabinet.  He  placed  Lord 
Palmerston  at  the  head  of  the  Foreign  Department, 
and  confided  the  Home  Office  to  Lord  Melbourne,  who, 
having  belonged  from  his  early  youth  to  the  Whig 
party,  had  accepted  the  office  of  Chief  Secretary  in 
Ireland  when  Mr.  Canning  was  Prime  Minister.  It  is 
even  supposed  that  Lord  Grey  would  have  consented 
to  leave  the  Great  Seal  in  the  hands  of  Lord  Lynd- 
hurst.  The  chiefs  of  the  Whig  party,  however,  were 
not  willing  to  see  this  high  office  in  the  hands  of  any 
other  person  than  Mr.  Brougham,  whose  splendid  elo- 
quence and  extraordinary  talents  had  won  for  him  the 
applause  of  the  country  and  the  admiration  of  his  party. 
Lord  Althorp,  therefore,  on  the  part  of  Lord  Grey, 
offered  him  the  Great  Seal,  and,  after  a  long  discussion, 
succeeded  in  persuading  Brougham  that  he  might  ren- 
der greater  services  to  his  country  and  to  his  party  by 
accepting  this  very  eminent  post  than  by  remaining  in 


56  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

an  independent  position  in  the  House  of  Commons.^ 
Lord  Althorp  himself  accepted  the  post  of  Chancellor 
of  the  Exchequer,  with  the  lead  of  the  House  of  Com- 
mons. He  was  very  unwilling  to  take  ofi&ce,  but  Lord 
Grey  assured  him  that  he  could  not  make  his  Ministry 
without  him,  and  it  was  some  consolation  to  him  to 
reflect,  in  accepting  the  office  of  Chancellor  of  the 
Exchequer,  that  he  could  only  hold  it  as  a  member  of 
the  House  of  Commons.  Mr.  Stanley  was  made  Chief 
Secretary  to  the  Lord  Lieutenant  of  Ireland,  an  office 
for  which  he  was  qualified  by  his  great  abilities  and 
his  unequalled  powers  of  debate ;  but  his  declarations 
in  favor  of  the  Established  Church  of  Ireland,  and  his 
temper,  little  tolerant  of  opposition,  gave  warning  of 
storms. 

The  Ministry  being  thus  constituted,  the  first  and 
most  important  object  to  which  their  attention  was 
turned  was  the  great  question  of  parliamentary  reform. 
Lord  Durham,  by  Lord  Grey's  desire,  invited  me  to 
consult  with  him  on  the  formation  of  a  committee  for 
the  purpose  of  framing  a  plan ;  Lord  Durham  proposed 
that  the  Duke  of  Richmond  should  be  a  member  of 
the  committee,  but,  as  the  Duke  had  never  been  a 
reformer,  I  objected  to  this  proposal,  and  we  agreed 
to  invite  Sir  James  Graham  and  Lord  Duncannon  to 
form  with  us  a  committee  for  the  proposed  purpose. 
Lord  Durham  and  Sir  James  Graham  were  in  the 
Cabinet;  Lord  Duncannon  and  I  were  not.  Lord 
Althorp  was  not  a  member  of  the  committee.     An 

I  Brougham  lind  at  tliis  time  made  up  his  mind  that  no  office  but  thnt 
of  Ixm]  Cluuuellor  could  properly  be  offered  to  him,  but  he  did  not  till 
the  lost  moment  nmko  up  his  mind  to  leave  the  House  of  Commons,  nnd 
give  up  his  Bent  for  Yorkshire.  His  mother,  who  hud  much  sense  and 
much  talent,  always  regretted  his  decision. 


COMMITTEE   ON  REFORM.  67 

outline  of  a  plan  of  reform,  to  which  I  have  elsewhere 
referred,  was  laid  by  me  before  that  committee,  and, 
with  some  alterations,  adopted  by  them.  On  the  prop- 
osition of  Lord  Durham,  vote  by  ballot  was  added  to 
the  outline,  and  the  whole  scheme  was  submitted  to 
Lord  Grey. 

The  Cabinet  of  Lord  Grey  contained  very  few  mem- 
bers who  had  supported  proposals  for  reform  of  Parlia- 
ment. Lord  Grey  himself,  and  Lord  Durham,  had  brought 
forward  motions  on  the  subject.  Lord  Brougham  and 
Lord  Althorp  had  warmly  supported  the  principle  of 
reform,  without  favoring  any  particular  plan.  Lord 
Durham  had  proposed  to  introduce  a  bill  dividing 
the  country  into  equal' electoral  districts;  and  Lord 
Brougham  had,  if  I  recollect  aright,  opened  to  a  meet- 
ing of  members  of  the  House  of  Commons,  in  Lord 
Al thorp's  room  at  the  'Albany,'  a  scheme  for  taking 
away  one  member  from  a  certain  number  of  the  smaller 
boroughs.^  Lord  Palmerston  and  Mr.  Grant  had,  with 
Lord  Melbourne,  followed  Mr.  Canning  in  his  opposi- 
tion to  parliamentary  reform.  Lord  Lansdowne  and 
Lord  Holland  had  never  been  very  eager  on  the  sub- 
ject ;  but  the  circumstances  of  the  country  required 
decisive  measures,  and  Lord  Grey  was  persuaded  that 
nothing  but  a  large  reform  of  Parliament  would  ward 
off  revolution.  In  this  opinion  the  Cabinet  partici- 
pated, and  adopted  our  plan,  but  without  the  ballot. 

I  was  so  fully  persuaded  that  the  country  would 
respond  with  enthusiasm  and  ready  assent  to  a  large 
proposal  of  reform,  that  I  entreated  Lord  Grey  to  im- 


1  I  see,  on  referring  to  Lord  Brougham's  *  Speeches/  vol.  iv.,  that  he 
says  he  was  in  favor  of  the  disfranchisement  of  some  boroughs,  though 
not  to  the  extent  proposed  in  the  bill  of  1831. 


^ 


68  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

press  upon  his  colleagues  the  necessity  of  secrecy,  in 
order  that  the  plan  might  come  with  all  the  freshness 
of  novelty  upon  the  public  ear,  and  deprive  our  oppo- 
nents of  the  advantage  of  making  adequate  prepara- 
tions to  resist  the  first  assault  upon  the  well-fortified 
entrenchments  of  the  enemy.  So  little  were  the  oppo- 
site party  prepared  for  the  bill,  that  a  few  days  before 
the  first  of  March,  Sir  Robert  Peel,  in  a  careful  speech, 
derided  what  had  been  done  on  the  subjects  of  peace 
and  retrenchment,  and  predicted  that  when  the  plan  of 
reform  should  be  developed,  it  would  occasion  disap^ 
pointment  by  the  meagreness  of  its  proportions,  and 
the  trifling  nature  of  the  changes  recommended. 

The  effect,  therefore,  of  the  revelations  of  the  first 
of  March  was  astounding.  I  had  purposely  omitted, 
or  passed  slightly  over,  those  arguments  in  favor  of 
reform,  which  in  1822  I  had  developed  at  length.  Sir 
Robert  Peel  observed  sarcastically  that  I  had  said  that 
many  ingenious  arguments  were  urged  in  favor  of  the 
ballot,  but  that  I  had  not  stated  any  ingenious  argu- 
ments in  favor  of  my  proposition  of  that  night.  This 
was  subs  tan  tiall}'-  true.  It  seemed  to  me  that  the 
arguments  in  favor  of  reform  had  made  their  impres- 
sion —  a  very  deep  impression  —  upon  the  country  ; 
but  that  tliose  arguments  had  become  trite  and  familiar, 
and  that  the  great  novelty  of  my  speech  must  consist 
in  a  clear  and  intelligible  statement,  of  the  nature  of 
the  proposition  I  had  to  make.  The  extinction  of  one 
hundred  and  fifty  scats  in  the  House  of  Commons,  tdl 
taken  from  the  class  of  boroughs  which  were  either 
dependent  or  venal,  would  amount,  if  carried,  to  a 
revolution. 

It  was  no  wonder,  therefore,  that  this  proposition, 
when  placed  boldly  and  baldly  before  the  House  of 


REFORM   BILL,  1831.  59 

Commons,  created  feelings  of  astonishment,  mingled 
with  joy  or  with  consternation,  according  to  the  temper 
of  the  hearers.  Mr.  John  Smith,  himself  a  member  for 
a  nomination  borough,  said  the  proposal  took  away  his 
breath.  Some,  perhaps  many,  thought  that  the  measure 
was  a  prelude  to  civil  war,  which,  in  point  of  fact,  it 
averted.  But  incredulity  was  the  prevailing  feeling, 
both  among  the  moderate  Whigs  and  the  great  mass  of 
the  Tories.  Sir  Henry  Hardinge  told  Sir  James  Graham 
that  he  supposed  we  should  all  go  out  the  next  morn- 
ing. Many  of  the  Whigs  thought  it  impossible  the 
Government  could  succeed,  either  in  the  existing  House 
of  Commons  or  by  an  appeal  to  the  people. 

The  Radicals  alone  were  delighted  and  triumphant. 
Joseph  Hume,  when  I  met  him  in  the  streets  a  day  or 
two  afterwards,  assured  me  of  his  hearty  support  of  the 
Government.  He  said  (on  another  subject,  in  a  public 
speech)  that  he  was  ready  to  vote  black  white  in  order 
to  carry  the  measure  of  reform.  Lord  Durham,  who  was 
sitting  under  the  gallery  on  the  first  of  March,  told  me 
he  was  inclined  to  doubt  the  reality  of  what  was  passing 
before  his  eyes.  A  noble  lord  who  sat  opposite  to  me, 
and  who  has  long  ago  succeeded  to  a  seat  in  the  House 
of  Lords,  cheered  me  so  vociferously  that  I  was  myself 
inclined  to  doubt  his  meaning.  J  found  afterwards  that 
his  cheers  were  meant  derisively,  to  show  his  thorough 
conviction  of  the  absurdity  and  impracticability  of  my 
proposals.^ 

For  my  own  part,  my  impression  had  always  been 
that  if  the  Reform  Bill  of  Lord  Grey  could  go  down  to 


1  I  had  thought  it  due  to  the  Cabinet  to  conceal  in  my  speech  the  part 
•which  I  had  taken  in  preparing  the  measure.  In  this  concealment  I  was 
not  justified ;  I  ought  to  have  told  the  whole  truth. 


60  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

the  country,  it  would  receive  such  an  amount  of  sup- 
port as  would  ensure  its  ultimate,  if  not  its  immediate, 
success.  I  was,  therefore,  much  pleased  when  I  found 
that  the  leaders  of  the  Opposition  did  not  intend  to  dis- 
pute the  introduction  of  the  bill,  and  still  more  satisfied 
when,  by  nine  nights  of  debate,  time  was  given  to  the 
country  to  hold  public  meetings,  and  to  communicate 
to  their  members  the  popular,  and,  what  turned  out  to 
be  the  almost  universal,  opinion  in  favor  of  the  proposed 
measure. 

The  second  reading  was  fixed  for  an  early  day,  and 
both  parties  prepared  anxiously  for  the  coming  conflict. 

Before  the  day  arrived,  many  members  who  had 
never  voted  for  reform  on  previous  occasions,  and  who 
were  really  hostile  to  any  change  in  the  representation, 
received  such  accounts  of  the  ferment  existing  in  the 
country,  that  they  made  up  their  minds  to  vote  in  favor 
of  the  second  reading.  Among  these  may  be  reckoned 
Sir  Thomas  Acland  and  Mr.  WUson  Patten,  the  one 
member  for  Devonshire,  and  the  other  for  Lancashire, 
both  excellent  country  gentlemen.  The  second  reading 
was  carried,  after  a  long  debate,  by  a  majority  of  one. 
I  never  saw  so  much  exultation  expressed  in  the  Hous^ 
of  Commons  as  upon  that  occasion.  One  member  threw 
his  hat  up  in  the  air,  and  the  vociferous  cheering  was 
prolonged  for  some  minutes. 

Yet  this  majority,  trifling  as  it  was,  was  far  from  ex- 
pressing the  intention  of  those  who  composed  it  to  give 
a  cordial  and  thorough  support  to  the  bill  in  the  shape 
in  which  it  was  introduced.  Many  amendments,  de- 
structive of  its  chief  provisions,  would  have  been  intro- 
duced and  carried,  had  the  bill  been  proceeded  with  in 
that  House  of  Commons. 

The  cry,  which  owed  its  origin  to  Lord  Brougham,  of 


DISSOLUTION  OF  PARLIAMENT,  1831.  61 

« The  Bill,  the  whole  Bill,  and  nothing  but  the  Bill,' 
was  intended  to  meet  this  disposition,  and  gave  the 
Government  a  very  powerful  lever  in  raising  the  country 
to  the  height  of  their  lofty  proposals,  while  it  did  not 
prevent  them  from  modifying  some  clauses  which  were 
ill-considered  or  unpopular. 

The  indisposition  of  the  House  was  soon  manifested. 
Upon  a  resolution  moved  by  General  Gascbigne,  that 
the  number  of  members  for  England  and  Wales  should 
not  be  diminished,  this  latent  hostility  burst  out.  Mr. 
William  Holmes,  in  the  course  of  the  debate,  said  pri- 
vately to  a  friend  of  the  Government,  '  For  good  or  for 
ill,  there  is  a  majority  of  eight  in  the  House  in  favor  of 
this  motion.'  So  it  appeared  on  the  division,  a  majority 
of  eight  voting  in  favor  of  General  Gascoigne's  motion. 

Upon  this  event,  it  became  the  duty  of  Lord  Grey 
and  his  colleagues  to  consider  seriously  their  position. 
They  had  brought  forward  a  great  measure  affecting 
the  constitution  of  the  country  and  the  course  of  legis- 
lation for  generations  to  come.  They  could  neither 
tamely  abandon  their  situation,  nor  allow  their  measure 
to  be  frittered  away,  and  rest  contented  with  the  frag- 
ment of  a  plan,  the  whole  of  which  had  been  enthusi- 
astically accepted  by  the  country.  It  was  manifest 
that  the  existing  House  of  Commons  would  endeavor 
to  destroy  in  detail  that  which  they  had  sanctioned  in 
the  bulk.  It  was  evident  that  the  country  was  ready 
to  follow  Lord  Grey,  and  to  adopt  his  measure  as  a 
satisfactory  settlement  of  a  question  which,  since  1780, 
had  always  been  in  the  minds  of  Liberal  politicians,  and 
which  was  now  rooted  in  the  heart  of  the  people. 

Lord  Grey,  therefore,  prepared  the  King  for  the  deci- 
sion to  which  the  Cabinet  arrived,  to  advise  his  Majesty 
to  have  recourse  to  an  immediate  dissolution  of  Parlia- 


62  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

ment.  The  King,  though  averse  to  the  adoption  of 
such  a  proceeding,  little  more  than  six  months  after  the 
general  election,  was  disposed,  at  this  time,  to  trust 
implicitly  to  Lord  Grey,  and  I  am  inclined  to  believe 
the  popular  story,  that  when  it  suddenly  appeared  nec- 
essary, in  order  to  prevent  remonstrance  from  the  House 
of  Lords,  that  the  King  should  appear  in  person  to  dis- 
solve Parliament,  and  some  trifling  difficulty  of  plaiting 
the  horses'  manes  in  time  was  interposed  as  an  objection, 
the  King  said  at  once, '  Then  I'll  go  down  to  Parliament 
in  a  hackney-coach.'  Had  such  been  the  spirit  of  Louis 
XVI.  he  might  have  been  the  leader  instead  of  the  vic- 
tim of  the  French  Revolution. 

The  scenes  which  occurred  in  the  two  Houses  of 
Parliament,  so  far  as  I  was  a  witness  of  them,  were 
singular  and  unprecedented.  Before  the  King  arrived, 
tlie  House  of  Commons  was  assembled,  and  Sir  Robert 
Peel  and  Sir  Francis  Burdett  rose  at  the  same  time  to 
address  the  House.  Lord  Althorp,  amid  the  confusion 
and  clamor  of  contending  parties,  following  the  prec- 
edent of  Mr.  Fox,  moved  that  Sir  Francis  Burdett  be 
now  heard.  Sir  Robert  Peel,  on  the  other  hand,  imitat- 
ing a  precedent  of  Lord  North,  said,  '  and  I  rise  to  speak 
to  that  motion.'  But  instead  of  saying  a  few  words,  as 
Lord  North  had  done,  to  put  an  end  to  all  further  debate, 
Sir  Robert  Peel  quite  lost  his  temper,  and  in  tones  of 
the  most  violent  indignation  attacked  the  impending 
dissolution.  As  he  went  on,  the  Tower  guns  began  to 
fire,  to  tmnounce  the  King's  arrival,  and  as  each  dis- 
charge was  lieard,  a  loud  cheer  from  tlie  Government 
side  interrupted  Sir  Robert  Peel's  declamation.  Sir 
Henry  Hardinge  was  licard  to  exclaim,  '  The  next  time 
those  guns  are  fired  they  will  be  shotted  I '  Presently 
we  were  all  summoned  to  the  House  of  Lords,  where 


GENERAL  ELECTION,  1831.  63 

the  King's  presence  had  put  a  stop  to  a  violent  and  un- 
seemly discussion.  The  King  in  his  speech  announced 
the  dissolution  and  retired  to  unrobe.  The  scene  that 
followed  was  one  of  great  excitement  and  confusion. 
As  I  was  standing  at  the  bar,  Lord  Lyndhurst  came  up 
to  me  and  said,  '  Have  you  considered  the  state  of  Ire- 
land ?  do  not  you  expect  an  insurrection  ?  '  or  words  to 
that  effect.  It  so  happened  that  in  going  into  the  House 
of  Commons,  I  had  met  O'Connell  in  the  lobby.  I  asked 
him,  '  Wni  Ireland  be  quiet  during  the  general  election  ?  ' 
and  he  answered  me,  '  Perfectly  quiet.'  He  did  not 
answer  for  more  than  he  was  able  to  perform.  But  of 
course  I  said  nothing  of  this  to  Lord  Lyndhurst,  and 
left  him  to  indulge  his  anger  and  his  gloomy  foreboding. 

Many  good  Liberals  were  in  great  despondency  about 
the  election,  and  fancied,  as  they  well  might,  that  an 
appeal  to  the  condemned  boroughs  to  sanction  their  own 
extinction,  would  meet  with  a  very  unfavorable  recep- 
tion, while,  on  the  other  hand,  Manchester,  Birmingham, 
Leeds,  and  Sheffield,  and  the  principal  manufacturing 
towns  of  Lancashire  and  Yorkshire,  would  be  unable  to 
take  part  in  the  election. 

But  the  forty-shilling  freeholders,  both  in  those  towns 
and  in  the  rural  counties,  made  themselves  heard  in 
favor  of  reforn).  Middlesex,  Yorkshire,  Lancashire, 
Devonshire,  were  unanimous  in  their  choice  of  reform 
candidates. 

The  members  for  the  English  counties,  with  the  addi- 
tion of  two  members  for  Yorkshire  in  place  of  Gram- 
pound,  were  altogether  82;  of  these  upwards  of  70,  I 
think  76,  pledged  themselves  to  support  Lord  Grey  and 
the  Reform  Bill.  The  proportion  of  the  two  parties 
appeared  on  the  second  reading,  when  there  divided  in 
favor  of  the  bill  367,  making,  with  9  pairs  and  2  tellers, 
378;  against  it  231,  with  the  same  addition  of  pairs  and 


64  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

tellers,  242,  giving  a  majority  of  136  for  the  Government 
and  the  Reform  Bill.  This  was  a  majority  which  no 
skilful  manoeuvres,  nor  even  the  authority  of  the  time- 
honored  House  of  Lords,  although  led  by  such  men  as 
the  Duke  of  Wellington  and  Lord  Lyndhurst,  were 
likely  to  counteract  or  overbear. 

The  Parliament  met  on  June  14,  and  after  the  election 
of  a  Speaker,  and  a  debate  on  the  address,  the  new 
Reform  Bill  was  immediately  introduced.  The  second 
reading,  as  I  have  said,  was  carried  by  a  large  majority, 
and  the  opponents  of  the  bill,  no  way  dismayed,  reserved 
their  opposition  for  committee.  For  forty  nights  the 
subject  was  discussed,  in  its  principles  as  well  as  in  its 
details.  Sir  Robert  Peel,  besides  objecting  to  the  large 
amount  of  disfranchisement  and  to  the  ten-pound  fran- 
chise, took  special  exception  to  the  partial  disfran- 
chisement in  Schedule  B,  and,  after  a  very  neat  and 
well-arranged  speech  of  Mr.  Praed,  Sir  Robert  argued, 
with  his  usual  force  and  ability,  that  more  room  should 
be  left  for  the  entrance  into  Parliament  of  men  of  retired 
and  studious  habits.  Subsequent  legislation  seems  to 
indicate  that,  according  to  public  opinion,  too  many 
seats,  rather  than  too  few,  were  left  to  men  of  retired 
and  studious  habits.  But,  besides  these  fair  and  plaus- 
ible objections  to  the  extent  and  democratic  tendency 
of  the  bill,  skilful  lawyers  like  Sir  Edward  Sugden  and 
Sir  Charles  Wetherell,  tried  to  unpick  it  thread  by 
thread,  leaving  no  remnant  of  the  original  texture. 
That  which  Penelope  did  to  keep  off  her  suitors,  they 
attempted  to  do  to  keep  off  reform.  But,  at  the  end  of 
forty  nights,  on  the  seventh  of  September,  the  debate 
was  closed,  and  after  much  labor,  and  considerable  sac- 
riJBce  of  healtli,  I  was  able,  on  that  night,  to  propose, 
amid  much  cheering,  that  the  bill  should  be  reported  to 
the  House. 


REFORM  BILL,  1831.  65 

The  bill  was  then  carried  to  the  House  of  Lords, 
and  on  October  2,  the  second  reading  was  proposed 
by  Lord  Grey.  There  never  was  a  debate  of  greater 
importance,  or  one  marked  by  more  ability.  Lord 
Grey's  opening  speech  recording  that,  in  1786,  he  had 
voted  with  Mr.  Pitt  in  favor  of  reform  of  Parliament ; 
his  clear  and  able  statement  of  the  reasons  which  seemed 
to  him  to  require  that  the  bill  should  be  adopted  by 
Parliament,  and  that  in  order  to  be  safe  and  enduring, 
it  should  be  large  and  commensurate  with  the  evil  to  be 
abated,  was  powerful  and  convincing. 

One  of  the  greatest  speeches  ever  delivered  in  the 
House  of  Lords  was  spoken  on  this  occasion  by  Lord 
Brougham ;  and  among  the  most  striking  parts  of  that 
speech,  was  the  reference  to  the  events  in  Ireland 
which  preceded  the  grant  of  Catholic  emancipation.  I 
copy  this  remarkable  passage  :  — '  Those  portentous 
appearances,  the  growth  of  later  times,  those  figures 
that  stalk  abroad,  of  unknown  stature  and  strange 
form  —  unions,  and  leagues,  and  musterings  of  men  in 
myriads,  and  conspiracies  against  the  Exchequer  — 
whence  do  they  spring,  and  how  come  they  to  haunt 
our  shores?  What  power  engendered  those  uncouth 
shapes  — -  what  multiplied  the  monstrous  births,  till  they 
people  the  land  ?  Trust  me,  the  same  power  which 
called  into  frightful  existence,  and  armed  with  resistless 
force  the  Irish  volunteers  of  1782  —  the  same  power 
which  rent  in  twain  your  empire,  and  conjured  up 
thirteen  republics  —  the  same  power  which  created  the 
Catholic  Association,  and  gave  it  Ireland  for  a  .portion. 
What  power  is  that  ?  Justice  denied  —  rights  withheld 
—  wi'ongs  perpetrated  —  the  force  which  common  in- 
juries lend  to  millions  —  the  wickedness  of  using  the 
sacred  trust  of  government  as  a  means  of  indulging 

5 


66  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

private  caprice  —  the  idiocy  of  treating  Englishmen  like 
the  children  of  the  South  Sea  Islands  —  the  frenzy  of 
believing,  or  making  believe,  that  the  adults  of  the 
nineteenth  century  can  be  led  like  children  or  driven 
like  barbarians.  This  it  is  that  has  conjured  up  the 
strange  sights  at  which  we  now  stand  aghast.  And 
shall  we  persist  in  the  fatal  error  of  combating  the 
giant  progeny,  instead  of  extirpating  the  execrable 
parent?  Good  God!  Will  men  never  learn  wisdom, 
even  from  their  own  experience?  Will  they  never 
believe,  till  it  be  too  late,  that  the  surest  way  to  pre- 
vent immoderate  desires  being  formed,  ay,  and  unjust 
demands  enforced,  is  to  grant,  in  due  season,  the 
moderate  requests  of  justice?  You  stand,  my  Lords, 
on  the  brink  of  a  great  event  —  you  are  in  the  crisis 
of  a  whole  nation's  hopes  and  fears.  An  awful  im- 
portance hangs  over  your  decision.  Pause,  ere  you 
plunge  I  There  may  not  be  any  retreat.  It  behooves 
you  to  shape  your  conduct  by  the  mighty  occasion. 
They  tell  you  not  to  be  afraid  of  personal  consequences 
in  discharging  your  duty.  I,  too,  would  ask  you  to 
banish  all  fears ;  but,  above  all,  that  most  mischievous, 
most  despicable  fear,  —  the  fear  of  being  thought  afraid. 
If  you  won't  take  counsel  from  me,  take  example  from 
the  statesmanlike  conduct  of  the  noble  Duke  (Wel- 
lington), while  5"0u  also  look  back,  as  you  may  with 
satisfaction,  upon  your  own.  He  was  told,  and  you 
were  told,  that  the  impatience  of  Ireland  for  equality 
of  civil  rights  was  partial,  the  clamor  transient,  likely 
to  pass  away  with  its  temporary  occasion,  and  that 
yielding  to  it  would  be  conceding  to  intimidation.  I 
recollect  hearing  this  topic  urged  within  this  House,  in 
July,  1829 ;  less  regularly  I  heard  it  than  I  have  now 
done,  for  \  belonged  not  to  your  number  —  but  I  heard 


REFORM  BILL  — LORD  BROUGHAM.  67 

it  urged  in  the  self-same  terms.  The  burthen  of  the 
cry  was — "It  is  no  time  for  concession:  the  people 
are  turbulent  and  the  Association  dangerous."  That 
summer  passed,  and  the  ferment  subsided  not.  Autumn 
came,  but  brought  not  the  precious  fruit  of  peace  —  on 
the  contrary,  all  Ireland  was  convulsed  with  the  un- 
precedented conflict  which  returned  the  great  chief 
of  the  Catholics  to  sit  in  a  Protestant  Parliament. 
Winter  bound  the  earth  in  chains;  but  it  controlled 
not  the  popular  fury,  whose  surges,  more  deafening 
than  the  tempests,  lashed  the  frail  bulwarks  of  law, 
founded  upon  injustice.  Spring  came,  but  no  ethereal 
mildness  was  its  harbinger,  or  followed  in  its- train  —  the 
Catholics  became  stronger  by  every  month's  delay, 
displayed  a  deadlier  resolution,  and  proclaimed  their 
wrongs  in  a  tone  of  louder  defiance  than  before.  And 
what  course  did  you,  at  this  moment  of  greatest  excite- 
ment and  peril  and  menace,  deem  it  most  fitting  to 
pursue  ?  Eight  months  before,  you  had  been  told  how 
unworthy  it  would  be  to  yield  when  men  clamored 
and  threatened.  No  change  had  happened  in  the 
interval,  save  that  the  clamors  were  become  far  more 
deafening,  and  the  threats  beyond  comparison  more 
overbearing.  What,  nevertheless,  did  your  Lordships 
do?  Your  duty  —  for  jon  despised  the  cuckoo-note 
of  the  season,  ''  Be  not  intimidated."  You  granted  all 
that  the  Irish  demanded,  and  you  saved  your  country. 
Was  there  in  April  a  single  argument  advanced  that 
had  not  held  good  in  July?  None,  absolutely  none, 
except  the  new  height  to  which  the  dangers  of  longer 
delay  had  risen,  and  the  increased  vehemence  with 
which  justice  was  demanded  —  and  yet  the  appeal  to 
your  pride  which  had  prevailed  in  July  was  in  vain 
made    in    April,    and    you    wisely    and    patriotically 


68  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

granted  what  was  asked,  and  ran  the  risk  of  being 
supposed  to  yield  through  fear.  But  the  history  of 
the  Catliolic  claims  conveys  another  important  lesson. 
Though,  in  right  and  policy  and  justice,  the  measure 
of  relief  could  not  be  too  ample,  half  as  much  as  was 
received  with  little  gratitude,  when  so  lately  wrung 
from  you,  would  have  been  hailed  twenty  years  before 
with  delight ;  and  even  the  July  preceding,  the  measure 
would  have  been  received  as  a  boon,  freely  given, 
which,  I  fear,  was  taken  but  with  sullen  satisfaction  in 
April,  as  a  right  long  withheld.  Yet,  blessed  be  God, 
the  debt  of  justice,  though  tardily,  was  at  length  paid, 
and  the  noble  Duke  won  by  it  civic  honors,  which 
rival  his  warlike  achievements  in  lasting  brightness  — 
than  which  there  can  be  no  higher  praise.  What  if  he 
had  still  listened  to  the  topics  of  intimidation  and 
inconsistency  which  had  scared  his  predecessors  ?  He 
might  have  proved  his  obstinacy,  and  Ireland  would 
have  been  the  sacrifice.' 

Lord  Grey  concluded  the  debate,  and  closed  his 
speech  in  the  following  remarkable  manner :  — 

*  The  noble  and  learned  lord  has  said,  that  if  I  were 
to  resign  of&ce,  it  would  be  a  culpable  abandonment  of 
the  King.  It  is  my  duty  to  consider  what  course  I 
shall  follow  under  the  circumstances  in  which  I  may  be 
placed.  I  certainly  will  not  abandon  the  King  as  long 
as  I  can  be  of  use  to  him.  I  am  bound  to  the  King  by 
obligations  of  gratitude,  greater,  perhaps,  than  subject 
ever  owed  to  a  sovereign,  for  the  kind  manner  in  which 
he  has  extended  to  me  his  confidence  and  support,  and 
for  the  indulgence  with  which  he  has  accepted  my  hum- 
ble but  zealous  exertions  in  his  service.  Therefore,  so 
long  as  I  can  be  a  useful  servant  to  him,  I  trust  that  it 
never  will  bo  a  reproach  to  me  that  I  abandoned  so  gra- 


REFORM  BILL  — LORD  GREY.  69 

cious  a  master.  But  I  can  only  serve  him  usefully  by 
maintaining  the  character  which  belongs  to  a  consistent, 
conscientious,  and  disinterested  course  of  public  con- 
duct ;  this  character  I  should  deservedly  forfeit,  if,  by 
any  consideration,  I  should  desert  principles  which  I 
believe  to  be  just,  or  give  up,  for  any  consideration 
whatever,  measures  which  I  believe  to  be  essential  to 
the  security,  happiness,  and  honor  of  my  Sovereign  and 
of  my  country.  If  I  could  fall  into  such  disgrace,  I 
should  be  at  once  disqualified  from  rendering  to  his 
Majesty  any  useful  service.  As  to  abilities,  I  am  too 
sensible  of  my  own  deficiency,  which  is  not  less  in  those 
other  quaUfications  which  long  habits  of  office  give.  All 
that  I  can  pretend  to  is  an  honest  zeal,  an  anxious  desire 
to  do  my  duty  in  the  best  way  I  can ;  as  long  as  he  is 
content  to  accept  my  services  on  those  terms,  no  per- 
sonal sacrifice  shall  stand  in  the  way  of  my  performing 
the  duty  which  I  owe  to  a  Sovereign  whose  claims  upon 
my  gratitude  and  devotion  can  never  be  obliterated  from 
my  heart,  whatever  may  happen,  to  the  last  moment  of 
my  existence.  I  had  no  desire  for  place,  and  it  was  not 
sought  after  by  me ;  it  was  offered  to  me  under  such 
circumstances  that  nothing  but  a  sense  of  duty  could 
have  induced  me  to  accept  it.  To  such  as  have  ob- 
served my  public  conduct,  I  think  I  need  make  no  such 
professions,  for  I  can  appeal  to  the  history  of  my  whole 
life  to  prove  that  I  have  not  been  actuated  by  an  un- 
worthy desire  for  office.  But  I  found  myself  placed  in 
a  situation  in  which,  to  shrink  from  the  task  imposed 
upon  me  by  the  too  partial  opinion  of  a  benevolent  mas- 
ter, would  have  been  the  dereliction  of  a  great  pubhc 
duty.  I  have  lived  a  long  life  of  seclusion  from  office 
—  I  had  no  official  habits  —  I  possessed  not  the  advan- 
tages which  those  official  habits  confer.     I  am  fond  of 


70  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

retirement  and  domestic  life,  and  I  lived  happy  and 
contented  in  the  bosom  of  my  family.  I  was  surrounded 
by  those  to  whom  I  am  attached  by  the  warmest  ties  of 
affection.  What,  then,  but  a  sense  of  duty  could  have 
induced  me  to  plunge  into  all  the  difficulties,  not  unfore- 
seen, of  my  present  situation  ?  What  else,  in  my  declin- 
ing age. 

What  else  could  tempt  me  on  those  stormy  seas, 
Bankrupt  of  life,  yet  prodigal  of  ease  ?  ^ 

I  defy  my  worst  enemy,  if  he  has  the  most  moderate 
share  of  candor,  to  find  ground  for  charging  me  with 
any  other  motive.  I  have  performed  my  duty  as  well 
as  I  am  able.  I  shall  still  continue  to  do  so,  as  long 
as  I  can  hope  to  succeed  in  the  accomplishment  of  an 
object  which  I  believe  to  be  safe,  necessary,  and  indis- 
pensable ;  but  should  this, hope  fail  me,  and  should  the 
Parliament  and  the  public  witlidi-aw  the  confidence  with 
which  I  have  been  hitherto  supported,  as,  in  that  case, 
I  could  no  longer  prove  a  useful  servant  to  my  King 
or  to  my  country,  I  would  instantly  withdraw  from 
office  into  the  retirement  of  private  life,  with  the  con- 
soling reflection  that,  whatever  my  other  defects  may 
be,  I  had  not  been  wanting,  according  to  the  best  of  my 
ability  and  judgment,,  in  a  faithful,  conscientious,  and 
zealous  discharge  of  what  I  felt  to  be  my  duty.* 

The  House  divided  about  six  o'clock  in  the  morning, 
at  the  end  of  five  days  and  nights  of  debate.  The  *  not 
contents,'  including  proxies,  were  199,  the  *  contents' 

A  Dry  den's  lines  are  — 

Punish  ft  body  which  ho  could  not  please, 
Bankrupt  of  life,  yet  prodigal  of  ease. 

Kither  Lord  Grey  altered  the  lines,  or  quoted  only  the  last  line,  and  the 
reporter  supplied  the  first. 


REFORM  BILL  — LORD  GREY.  71 

158,  giving  a  majority  against  the  second  reading  of  41. 
It  became  now  a  very  serious  question  with  Lord  Grey, 
whether  he  should  remain  in  office,  or  whether  he  should 
throw  upon  his  opponents  the  entire  responsibility  of 
carrying  on  the  Government  in  the  midst  of  an  excite- 
ment of  a  very  dangerous  character.  Lord  Grey  decided, 
rightly,  as  I  think,  that  he  would  not  desert  his  Sover- 
eign nor  abandon  his  high  post,  while  he  had  any  hopes 
of  being  able  to  carry  a  great  measure  of  reform.  On 
the  seventeenth  of  the  same  month  (October),  in  ex- 
plaining what  he  was  alleged  to  have  said  to  a  deputa- 
tion, he  gave  the  following  account  of  his  position :  — 
'  He  did  state  that  some  alterations  in  the  late  bill  would 
be  necessary  before  it  was  re-introduced,  and  that  it 
would  be  for  his  Majesty's  Ministers,  during  the  recess, 
carefully  to  consider  what  those  alterations  should  be ; 
but  he  distinctly  added  that  he  would  never  be  a  party 
to,  or  recommend  any  measure  of  reform  which  was  not 
founded  on  any  similar  principles,  and  as  effective,  as 
regarded  its  declared  object,  as  that  which  was  lately 
before  Parliament.  This  was  the  whole  of  what  passed 
between  him  and  the  delegates  from  the  parishes,  except 
that  when  they  represented  to  him  that  if  satisfaction 
was  not  given  to  the  public,  as  to  the  length  of  time  on 
which  Parliament  was  to  be  prorogued,  it  would  tend  to 
increase  the  agitation  and  excitement  which  prevailed ; 
he  felt  himself  called  upon  to  inform  those  who  commu- 
■  nicated  with  him,  that  it  was  their  duty  to  use  all  the 
means  in  their  power  to  repress  agitation  and  excite- 
ment, and  to  keep  the  people  in  obedience  to  the  laws 
of  the  country,  that  the  Ministers  might  not  be  placed 
in  the  painful  situation  of  being  compelled  to  use  those 
powers  which,  as  a  Government,  it  was  their  duty  to 
use,  for  the  preservation  of  the  public  peace.     With 


72  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

respect  to  the  prorogation,  he  would  only  say,  that 
whatever  might  be  the  length  of  the  period  to  which  his 
Majesty's  Ministers  thought  it  their  duty  to  recommend 
his  Majesty  to  prorogue  Parliament,  it  would  be  regu- 
lated by  a  sincere  desire  to  do  that  which  they  consid- 
ered most  conducive  to  the  advancement  of  the  great 
measure  of  parliamentary  reform.' 

Tlie  rejection  of  the  bill  in  the  House  of  Lords  made 
it  necessary  to  review  some  of  the  most  important  pro- 
visions of  the  original  bill,  so  as  to  preserve  its  prin- 
ciples and  maintain  its  efficiency,  correcting  at  the  same 
time  some  of  the  details  which,  from  the  ignorance  and 
inexperience  of  its  authors  in  matters  of  government 
and  legislation,  had  proved  to  be  defective.  The  first 
list  of  boroughs  to  be  entirely  or  partially  disfranchised 
had  been  made  out  by  consulting  the  tables  of  popula- 
tion for  1821.  These  tables  contained  the  population 
of  parishes,  not  of  boroughs  or  towns  ;  and  the  bounda- 
ries of  parishes  were  sometimes  widely  different,  either 
in  excess  or  deficiency,  from  those  of  the  boroughs 
which  were  to  be  the  objects  of  penal  extinction.  Com- 
missioners were  appointed  by  the  Secretary  of  State  for 
the  Home  Department  to  rectify  these  details,  and  tliey 
were  instructed  to  ascertain  the  boundaries  of  the  bor- 
oughs to  which  the  right  of  sending  members  to  Parlia- 
ment had  been  granted.  Further  than  this,  a  new  test 
of  importance  was  taken,  borrowed  very  much  from  the 
tests  of  defranchisement  applied  in  the  Act  of  Union 
with  Ireland,  and  announced  by  Pitt  at  the  time.  We 
took,  therefore,  the  number  of  houses  as  a  test  of  the 
€xisting  population,  and  the  amount  of  assessed  taxes 
paid  as  the  test  of  property  in  boroughs. 

From  these  two  elements  combined,  a  list  of  the  bor- 
oughs was  formed,  with  a  view  to  their  relative  impor- 


EEFORM  BILL,   1831.  T3 

tance.  The  compound  ratio  was  calculated  by  Mr. 
Drummond,  on  a  scientific  principle.  This  was  ap- 
proved by  Mr.  Davies  Gilbert,  a  mathematician  of  emi- 
nence, who  was  at  one  time  President  of  the  Royal 
Society.  Mr.  Croker,  who  seemed  to  be  ignorant  of 
all  mathematical  science,  alone  doubted  the  accuracy  of 
the  rule  adopted. 

With  regard  to  the  boundaries  of  boroughs,  of  towns 
newly  enfranchised,  and  of  counties  to  be  divided,  the 
reports  of  commissioners  were  sent  up  to  London,  and 
were  referred  to  Mr.  Littleton,  afterwards  Lord  Hather- 
ton,  a  liberal  but  moderate  politician,  and  to  Admiral 
Beaufort,  whose  views  were  purely  scientific.  I  some- 
times assisted  at  their  deliberations,  especially  when 
there  was  any  discrepancy  in  the  opinions  of  the  differ- 
ent commissioners.  But  the  whole  process,  whether  of 
singling  out  small  boroughs,  and  placing  them  in  the 
list  for  disfranchisement,  or  of  enlarging  the  boundaries 
of  old  boroughs,  or  of  marking  the  limits  of  new  bor- 
oughs and  divisions  of  counties,  was  performed,  so  far 
as  I  am  aware,  with  an  entire  absence  of  party  bias. 

Of  course,  the  addition  or  subtraction  of  particular 
districts  hail  an  effect  favorable  to  one  party  or  the 
other ;  thus  the  Liberal  party  at  Stamford,  who  had 
succeeded  in  returning  Mr.  Tennyson  D'Eyncourt,  in 
opposition  to  the  influence  of  the  Marquis  of  Exeter, 
lost  all  chance  of  opposing  that  influence  with  success 
when  a  suburb  was  added,  which  properly  formed  a 
part  of  the  town  of  Stamford,  but  which  was  chiefly 
inhabited  by  the  tenants  of  Lord  Exeter.  Thus,  in  an 
opposite  political  direction,  the  influence  of  the  Duke 
of  Somerset  at  Totnes  was  increased,  by  adding  to  the 
borough  a  part  of  the  town  which  lay  on  the  opposite 
side   of  the  river  Dart.     Thus,  in  particular  counties, 


7'4  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

Whig  or  Tory  proprietors  derived  some  advantage  from 
the  particular  line  of  boundary  adopted,  but  without 
any  intention  on  the  part  of  the  Government  to  secure 
any  advantage  to  themselves.  In  fact,  the  Boundary 
Bill,  framed  upon  these  reports,  was  adopted  with  very 
little  discussion,  and,  except  with  regard  to  the  borough 
of  Arundel,  now  disfranchised,  with  no  important  altera- 
tion. 

The  number  of  boroughs  to  be  wholly  or  partially 
disfranchised  had  been,  in  my  original  sketch,  arbitrarily 
fixed.  Lord  Durham  had  suggested  that  the  penalty 
of  total  disfranchisement  should  be  confined  to  towns, 
or  rather  villages,  of  less  than  two  thousand  inhabitants, 
and  that  none  under  four  thousand  should  return  more 
than  one  member.  But  the  arbitrary  line  was  now 
again  resorted  to  ;  the  number  of  boroughs  to  be  wholly 
or  partially  disfranchised  was  copied  from  the  bill  re- 
jected by  the  House  of  Lords,  and  the  test  I  have  men- 
tioned was  applied  to  that  number,  so  that  fifty-six 
boroughs,  returning  one  hundred  and  eleven  members, 
were  placed  in  Schedule  A  for  total  extinction,  and 
thirty  boroughs,  returning  sixty  members,  were  con- 
demned to  lose  half  their  representatives.  In  this  man- 
ner,^ one  hundred  and  forty-one  seats  belonging  to 
boroughs  which,  since  the  days  of  Charles  I.,  had  regu- 
larly sent  members  to  Parliament,  were  cut  off  on  account 
of  their  dependence  or  their  insignificance.  By  my 
original  sketch,  one  hundred  and  forty-nine  scats  would 
have  been  disfranchised. 

This  was  the  most  popular  part  of  the  Reform  Bill. 
The  country  argued  that  from  these  boroughs,  in 
scarcely  any  of  which  the  element  of  popular  represen- 
tation existed,  had  arisen  all  obstructions  to  the  reforms 
and  retrenchments  which  the  people  so  evidently  de- 


REFORM  BILL,  1881.  -75 

sired.  As  this  was  the  strong  and  popular  position  of 
the  Government,  it  would  evidently  be  a  great  mistake, 
on  the  part  of  our  opponents,  to  direct  their  attack 
against  it;  yet,  as  we  shall  presently  see,  this  was. the 
part  of  our  lines  singled  out  for  attack  in  the  House  of 
Lords. 

The  obstruction  and  delay  from  which  the  former 
bill  had  suffered  in  its  passage  through  the  House  of 
Commons  were  only  partially  renewed.  On  March  9, 
the  bill  was  in  committee  for  the  twenty-first  day,  and 
on  the  next  day,  March  10,  the  report  was  received. 
On  March  22,  the  bill  was  read  a  third  time,  after  a 
division,  in  which  the  ayes  were  355,  and  the  noes 
239;  majority,  116. 

Throughout  the  debates  which  took  place  upon  the 
Eeform  Bill,  while  Lord  Althorp  and  I  had  the  greater 
portion  of  the  labor,  and  a  still  larger  portion  of  the 
responsibility,  the  palm  of  eloquence  in  debate  belonged 
undoubtedly  to  Lord  Stanley.  Conscious  of  my  own 
deficiencies,  I  had,  on  the  first  introduction  of  the 
Reform  Bill,  stipulated  with  Lord  Althorp  that  Mr. 
Grant,  and  not  I,  should  undertake  the  task,  the 
weightiest  that  belongs  to  a  leader,  of  reply  at  the  end 
of  the  debate.  But  Mr.  Grant  contented  himself  with 
general  adherence  to  the  principles  of  the  bill,  while 
Lord  Stanley,  by  his  animated  appeals  to  the  Liberal 
majority,  by  his  readiness  in  answering  the  sophisms  of 
his  opponents,  by  the  precision  and  boldness  of  his 
language,  by  his  display  of  all  the  great  qualities  of  a 
parliamentary  orator  and  an  able  statesman,  successfully 
vindicated  the  authority  of  the  Government,  and  satis- 
fied their  supporters  in  the  House  of  Commons. 

While  Sir  Robert  Peel  was  the  most  eminent,  both 
in  weight  of  argument  and  in  oratorical  ability,  of  the 


76  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

opponents  of  the  bill,  Mr.  Croker,  by  his  profusion 
of  words,  by  his  warmth  of  declamation,  and  by  his 
elaborate  working  out  of  details,  was  perhaps  a  still 
more  formidable  adversary.  He  told  Lord  Althorp, 
in  private,  that  when  he  discovered  the  error  we  had 
made  of  confounding  the  limits  of  parishes  with  those 
of  Parliamentary  boroughs,  he  thought  himself  sure  of 
defeating  the  bill.  But  his  own  statements  of  details 
were  singularly  inaccurate  ;  and  even  where  the  par- 
ticular point  upon  wliich  he  insisted  was  not  mistaken, 
his  exaggerations  of  its  importance  were  repulsive  to 
the  House  of  Commons.  Above  all,  the  tide  of  opinion 
flowed  so  rapidly,  that  all  obstacles  were  swept  away, 
like  Canute's  chair,  by  the  advancing  waves.  Thus  the 
bill  which  had  been  introduced  to  the  notice  of  the 
House  of  Commons  on  March  1,  1831,  was  finally 
passed  on  March  22,  1832,  but  little  impaired  in  effi- 
ciency. It  overthrew  a  system  which  had  been  left 
untouched  at  the  Revolution,  —  a  period  when  the  wisest 
patriots,  forced  by  necessity  to  transfer  the  Crown  to  a 
foreign  prince,  had  been  careful  rather  to  maintain  the 
ancient  privileges  of  the  Constitution  than  to  disturb 
other  parts  of  the  existing  edifice.  The  same  system 
had  enabled  Sir  Robert  Walpole  to  consolidate  the 
throne  of  the  House  of  Hanover,  amidst  internal  and 
external  dangers.  But  the  same  system  enabled  Lord 
North  to  maintain  his  power  against  the  fair  demands 
and  justifiable  insurrection  of  the  North  American  Col- 
onies, even  after  the  people  had  become  tired  of  tho 
contest  against  our  fellow-subjects  in  America.  The 
same  system  enabled  Mr.  Pitt  and  his  successors  to 
increase  the  public  debt  from  about  two  hundred  and 
thirty  millions  to  eight  hundred  millions,  and  to  restrict, 
by  the  most  severe  laws,  the  right  of  public  meeting, 


REFORM  BILL,  ISSlf  77 

and  the  liberty  of  the  press.  The  fidelity  with  which 
the  majority  of  the  House  of  Commons  had  supported 
the  French  War,  and  its  costly  armaments,  led  Pitt  to 
renounce  all  his  early  theories  upon  reform,  and  induced 
him  to  rely  on  the  construction  of  that  House  as  a  firm 
barrier  against  democratic,  or,  as  it  was  then  called, 
Jacobin  revolution.  But  the  same  willingness  to  sanc- 
tion expense  on  the  part  of  the  Government,  and  to 
punish  excesses  on  the  part  of  the  people,  which  had 
conciliated  the  opinion  of  Pitt,  had  estranged  the  j)ublic 
mind.  Government,  by  nomination-boroughs,  had  be- 
come odious  to  the  community  at  large  ;  ^nd  the  House 
of  Commons,  which  voted  by  a  majority  of  more  than 
a  hundred  its  own  extinction,  did  but  sanction  the 
judicial  sentence  of  the  country. 

New  perils,  however,  awaited  the  measure  in  the 
House  of  Lords.  In  view  of  the  large  majority  which 
had  rejected  the  bill  in  October,  Lord  Grey  had  thought 
it  right  to  consider  what  should  be  done  if  the  same 
obstacles  should  recur.  He  and  his  colleagues  could 
perceive  no  other  resource  than  that  of  advising  the 
King  to  create  a  large  number  of  peers. 

From  1784  to  1830,  the  prerogative  of  the  Crown  to 
create  peers  had  been  exercised  almost  entirely  by  the 
chiefs  of  the  Tory  party.  The  addition  of  about  eighty 
or  one  hundred  peers,  solely  from  one  party,  had  en- 
tirely overthrown  the  old  balance  of  parties  in  the 
House  of  Lords.  Besides  the  new  creations,  many 
peers  who  attached  themselves  to  the  Minister  of  the 
day  had  received  higher  titles  as  the  reward  of  their 
political  attachment.  Earls  had  been  made  Marquises ; 
Viscounts  and  Barons  had  been  made  Earls.  The  old 
and  venerable  titles  which  they  had  received  from  their 
ancestors  were  exchanged  for  coronets  of  a  more  ex- 


78  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

alted  degree,  siGfnificant  of  their  adhesion  to  Tory  policy 
and  Tory  Ministers.  They  could  not  be  expected  to 
forget  these  recent  favors,  or  .the  hands  by  which  they 
had  been  conferred.  At  the  same  time,  the  creation 
of  sixty  or  seventy  peers  for  a  particular  purpose, 
though  undoubtedly  within  the  prerogative  of  the 
Crown,  and  not  more  than  an  adequate  exercise  of  the 
power  which  had  secured  a  majority  to  the  Tory  Min- 
isters of  Queen  Anne,  was  felt  to  be  a  measure  likely 
to  shake  the  confidence  of  the  country  in  the  stabiHty 
of  our  ancient  institutions.  Admitting  that  the  pre- 
rogative of  cheating  peers  had  been  abused  by  Pitt, 
and  still  more  by  Lord  Liverpool,  Lord  Grey,  as  a  fol- 
lower of  Fox,  was  sure  to  be  averse  to  any  steps  which 
might  seem  inconsistent  with  unbounded  reverence  for 
the  Constitution  of  these  realms.  It  was  thought,  there- 
fore, by  the  Ministry  and  their  supporters,  that  every 
effort  ought  to  be  made  to  secure  a  majority  by  con- 
ciliating the  opponents  of  the  bill.  Lords  Harrowby 
and  Wharncliffe,  who  were  in  that  day  called  the 
waverers,  met  Lord  Grey  and  Lord  Palmerston,  in 
order  to  suggest  alterations  which  might  conciliate  some 
who  were  not  hostile  in  principle  to  reform,  but  who 
considered  the  bill  of  1831  as  dangerous  and  revolu- 
tionary. It  was  found,  however,  that  the  alterations 
proposed  would  seriously  impair  the  efficiency  of  the 
bill.  Lord  Harrowby  and  Lord  Wharncliffe,  therefore, 
while  they  agreed  to  support  the  second  reading,  were 
left  at  liberty  to  propose  their  own  amendments  in 
committee,  without  the  promise  of  any  concession  on 
the  part  of  Lord  Grey.  Various  members  of  the  ISIin- 
istry  wrote  to  their  friends  in  the  House  of  Lords, 
pointing  out  to  them  the  danger  of  a  large  creation  of 
peers,  and  exhorting  them  to  ward  off  that  danger  by 


REFORM  BILL,  MAY,  1832.  79 

supporting  the  Reform  Bill.  Of  three  peers  to  whom 
I  wrote  with  this  object,  one  supported  the  second 
reading,  one  abstained  from  voting,  and  the  third  re- 
peated his  vote  against  the  bill. 

It  was  considered  by  the  Cabinet  that  these  endeav- 
ors to  procure  a  majority  were  not  of  themselves  suffi- 
cient, and  that  the  King  should  be  asked  to  consent  to 
a  creation  of  peers  as  guarded  and  limited  as  possible, 
in  case  of  the  rejection  of  the  bill  on  the  second  reading. 
This  proposal,  although  very  unpalatable  to  the  King, 
received  his  Majesty's  sanction.  Whether  the  leaders 
of  the  Tory  party  had  any  inkling  of  what  had  passed 
I  cannot  tell,  but  they  seemed  to  have  framed  their  plan 
of  campaign  on  the  supposition  that  the  second  reading 
would  be  carried  by  the  Government.  On  April  13, 
the  House  divided :  contents,  184 ;  non-contents,  175  ; 
majority,  9.  The  bill  was  read  a  second  time,  and  or- 
dered to  be  committed  on  the  first  day  after  the  recess. 
The  House  adjourned  at  a  quarter  past  seven  o'clock  in 
the  morning.  On  April  17,  the  House  adjourned  for 
the  Easter  recess,  and  on  May  7,  when  the  House  met 
again,  the  bill  was  considered  in  committee.  It  was 
understood  that  Lord  Lyndhurst  meant  to  move  the 
postponement  of  the  disfranchising  clauses  of  the  bill. 
On  that  day  I  met  Lord  Grey  riding  in  the  Park,  and 
rode  with  him  to  the  Park  door  of  his  official  house  in 
Downing  Street.  I  was  anxious  to  ascertain  what  lan- 
guage he  intended  to  hold,  and  was  gratified  to  find  that 
he  considered  Lord  Lyndhurst's  proposal  one  of  vital 
importance,  and  that  he  meant  to  hold  firm  language  in 
the  debate.  With  this  assurance  from  Lord  Grey,  1  felt 
quite  certain  of  a  speedy  and  triumphant  issue  of  the 
contest.  The  debate  was  anxious  and  interesting,  but 
was  not  protracted.     The  Tory  peers  who  had  supported 


80  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

the  second  reading  of  the  bill,  with  an  unconquerable 
aversion  to  its  principles  and  its  objects,  now  went  over 
in  a  body  to  the  Opposition.  Some  of  the  more  prudent 
of  the  Tories  were  alarmed  at  the  near  prospect  of  their 
temporary  triumph. 

The  Earl  of  Harewood,  who  had  had  much  experience 
in  the  House  of  Commons,  said :  *  He  wished  to  exoner- 
ate himself  from  being  a  party  to  any  project  or  indirect 
contrivance  to  defeat  the  bill.  If  the  proposition  (the 
amendment)  contained  in  it  any  thing  which  he  did  not 
understand,  or  any  thing  sinister,  he  would  not  support 
it.  He  wished  that  more  time  were  allowed  to  promul- 
gate what  was  meant  to  be  proposed,  if  the  proposition 
were  successful ;  and  if  that  were  the  case,  he  was  sure 
all  feelings  of  acrimony  on  the  other  (the  Ministerial) 
side  would  be  done  away.  He  thought,  if  the  amend- 
ments to  be  proposed  were  seen  and  known,  they  would 
remove  all  the  objections  which  the  noble  Lords  oppo- 
site might  have  to  the  amendment.  He  had  no  idea 
that  the  object  was  to  get  rid  of  Schedule  A ;  and  if  it 
were,  he  certainly  would  not  join  in  any  such  object. 
He  believed  that  the  plan  of  enfranchisement  to  be  pro- 
posed would  include  all  Schedule  A,  and  perhaps  more, 
and  he  had  no  predisposition  to  defeat  that  schedule. 
There  might  be  sooue  variations,  perhaps,  in  the  places 
to  be  disfranchised,  but  he  believed  if  the  enfranchise- 
ment were  first  agreed  to,  the  places  to  be  disfranchised 
would  be  identical  with  those  places  in  Schedule  A. 
There  were  difficulties  about  the  question  which  the 
plan  proposed  by  the  noble  and  learned  Lord  might  get 
rid  of.  If  the  noble  Earl  (Grey)  did  not  look  on  the 
proposition  in  a  hostile  light,  much  might  be  done  to 
bring  about  a  satisfactory  settlement  of  the  whole  ques- 
tion.' 


EEFORM  BILL,   MAY,  1832.  81 

Lord  Wharncliffe,  who  spoke  before  Lord  Hare  wood, 
said  he  could  assure  the  noble  Lords  opposite  that  there 
was  no  disposition  on  the  Opposition  side  of  the  House 
to  be  niggardly  as  to  the  amount  of  disfranchisement. 
The  Duke  of  Newcastle,  he  remarked,  had  said  that  he 
would  give  his  support  to  the  amendment,  in  order 
that  the  bill  might  not  pass  ;  but  that  was  not  his  view. 
After  what  had  passed,  he  could  not  do  any  thing  to 
violate  the  pledge  he  had  given ;  and  he  was  prepared 
to  go  the  whole  length  of  Schedule  A.  If  the  amend- 
ment succeeded,  he  should  vote,  he  believed,  for  the 
whole  of  Schedule  A,  and  would  not  give  his  consent  to 
any  amendment  which  would  reduce  the  amount  of  dis- 
franchisement. 

Earl  Grey  was  not,  however,  to  be  intimidated  or 
cajoled.  *  He  hoped,'  he  said,  '  the  noble  Lords  present 
would  not  deceive  themselves  ;  but  he  must  say  that  if 
the  motion  was  successful,  it  would  be  fatal  to  the 
whole  bill.  Should  the  amendment  be  carried,  it  will 
be  necessary  for  me  to  consider  what  course  I  shall  take. 
More  I  will  not  say  than  what,  on  a  former  occasion, 
was  stated  by  the  noble  Earl  on  the  other  side,  —  and 
it  was  not  denied  by  any  other  person,  —  that  this  bill 
had  found  support  in  public  opinion.  Noble  Lords  de- 
ceive themselves  if  they  suppose  that  opinion^ in  favor 
of  this  bill  is  relaxed ;  and  certainly  I  dread  the  effect 
of  the  House  of  Lords  opposing  itself  a^n  insurmount- 
able barrier  to  what  the  people  think  necessary  for  the 
good  government  of  the  country,  and  a  sufficient  repre- 
sentation.' '  More  he  would  not  say,  than'  that  to  the 
motion  of  the  noble  and  learned  Lord  he  meant  to  give 
his  most  determined  opposition.'  '^ 

The   committee   divided   on   the   amendment:    con- 

6 


82  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

tents,  151 ;  non-contents,  116  ;  majority  in  favor  of  the 
amendment,  35. 

On  the  motion  that  the  next  clause  be  postponed, 
to  which  Lord  Grey  did  not  object.  Lord  Ellenborough 
took  the  opportunity,  ill-timed  as  it  appeared  to  be,  to 
propose  a  scheme  of  his  own.  He  said  he  should  not 
object  to  the  disfranchisement  to  the  full  extent  of 
Schedule  A,  making,  with  the  members  for  the  borough 
of  Weymouth,  one  hundred  and  thirteen  seats  to  be 
placed  at  the  disposal  of  Parliament.  Neither  did  he 
object  to  the  ten-pound  qualification,  provided  it  were 
better  defined. 

The  immediate  consequence  of  the  vote  on  Lord 
Lyndhurst's  amendment  was  a  meeting  of  the  Cabinet 
to  consider  their  new  position.  It  was  evident  that  the 
House  of  Lords  had  determined,  by  a  large  majority, 
to  defeat  the  bill,  which  had  the  enthusiastic  support 
of  the  House  of  Commons.  With  the  exception  of  the 
Duke  of  Richmond,  the  Cabinet  were  unanimous  in 
thinking  that  no  course  was  left  to  them  but  that  of 
proposing  to  the  King  to  sanction  a  creation  of  peers 
sufficiently  numerous  to  overbear  the  opposition  of  the 
Lords.  Lord  Grey  as  Prime  Minister,  ani  Lord 
Brougham  as  Lord  Chancellor,  carried  this  advice  to 
Windsor.  The  King,  anxious  as  he  was  to  see  a  Re- 
form Bill  carried,  and  even  willing  to  go  to  a  consider- 
able extent  in  favor  of  Lord  Grey's  bill,  shrank  from  the 
alternative  now  proposed  to  him.  It  seemed  to  hin>y 
that  to  overbear  the  majority  of  the  House  of  Lords  was 
to  destroy  the  independence  of  that  body.  He  there- 
fore at  once  rejected  the  advice  of  his  Ministera.  Lord 
Grey  and  Lord  Brougham  returned  to  London  to  report 
this  decision  to  their  colleagues. 

The   next  day  Lord  Lyndhiu^t  was   sent  for,   and 


REFORM  BILL,  MAY,  1832.  ,       88 

informed  that  the  King  had  accepted  the  resignation  of 
his  Ministers,  and  was  determined,  if  possible,  to  form 
a  Government  on  the  principle  of  carrying  an  extensive 
reform  in  the  representation  of  the  people.  The  Duke 
of  Wellington,  impelled  by  that  honorable  feeling  of 
loyalty  to  the  Crown  which  induced  him  to  incur  any 
risk,  and  almost  to  surrender  any  opinion,  rather  than 
show  himself  wanting  in  zeal  for  his  Sovereign,  informed 
Lord  Lyndhurst  that  he  would  endeavor  to  form  a 
Government  in  compliance  with  the  King's  wishes. 
From  Sir  Robert  Peel  Lord  Lyndhurst  received  a  very 
different  answer.  He  declined  to  make  himself  respon- 
sible for  a  bill  which,  in  his  opinion,  as  he  had  often  and 
publicly  declared,  would  entail  great  calamities  on  the 
country.  He  therefore  refused  to  accept  office,  while 
he  professed  his  readiness  to  give  such  support  to  the 
efforts  of  the  Duke  of  Wellington  as  his  opinions  would 
permit  him  to  afford. " 

There  was  something  remarkable  in  the  contrast 
between  the  conduct  of  the  Duke  of  Wellington  and 
that  of  Sir  Robert  Peel  at  this  crisis.  They  were  both 
men  of  high  character,  both  anxious  for  the  honor  of 
their  Sovereign  and  the  welfare  of  their  country.  Their 
position  appeared  similar,  if  not  identical.  Yet  the 
Duke  of  Wellington  declared  that  if  he  had  refused 
to  assist  in  the  formation  of  a  Government  he  should 
have  been  ashamed  to  show  his  face  in  the  streets ; 
while  Sir  Robert  Peel  declared  in  the  House  of  Commons 
that  if  he  had  accepted  the  task  proposed  to  him  he 
could  not  have  walked  upright  into  that  House.  The 
Duke  of  Wellington's  feeling  was  one  of  excessive  loy- 
alty as  a  subject,  Sir  Robert  Peel's  that  of  dignity  and 
consistency  as  a  statesman.  We  have  no  right  to  with- 
hold our  meed  of  respect  from  either  of  them. 


84  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

It  has  been  commonly  supposed  that,  after  the  refusal 
of  Sir  Robert  Peel,  the  Duke  of  Wellington  had  recourse 
to  Mr.  Alexander  Baring,  a  man  of  great  experience,  of 
great  abiUty,  and  intimately  acquainted  with  the  means 
by  which  the  credit  of  the  country  was  upheld.  But 
while  these  negotiations  were  pending,  and  while  Mr. 
Baring,  whose  mind  was  irresolute,  doubted  as  to  the 
course  he  should  pursue,  events  rushed  rapidly  on,  and 
turned  liis  hesitation  into  despair. 

London  and  the  country  were  not  only  awake,  but 
highly  excited  at  the  crisis  before  them.  Men  who 
would  have  accepted  with  satisfaction  the  disfranchise- 
ment of  ten  small  boroughs,  and  the  enfranchisement 
of  ten  large  manufacturing  towns  three  years  before, 
were  now  not  in  the  least  appeased  by  Lord  Ellen- 
borough's  offer  to  sacrifice  one  hundred  and  thirteen 
seats,  and  to  fill  them  up  from  unrepresented  places. 
Nine  years  previously  I  had  said  that  if  reform  were  not 
allowed  to  follow  its  course  with  the  majesty  of  a  river, 
it  would  rush  on  with  the  madness  of  a  torrent.  I  had 
been  laughed  at  by  one  of  my  Tory  friends  for  tliis 
phrase,  but  he  and  others  were  now  earned  away  by  that 
torrent,  the  approach  of  which  they  had  so  little  fore- 
seen. This  was  indeed  a  moment  of  peril.  It  was  the 
only  time  during  my  political  life  in  which  I  have  felt 
uneasy  as  to  the  result.  Fortunately,  in  this  as  in  other 
cases,  the  House  of  Commons  proved  the  safety-valve  of 
society. 

On  the  very  day,  May  9,  when  Lord'  Althorp  an- 
nounced the  fact  of  the  resignation  of  Ministers,  Lord 
Ebrington  gave  notice  of  a  motion,  for  the  next  day, 
for  an  address  to  the  Crown,  to  implore  his  Majesty  to 
call  to  his  councils  such  persons  only  as  will  carry  into 
•  effect,  unimpaired  in  all  its  essential  provisions,  that  bill 


RESIGNATION  OF  MINISTERS.  85 

for  reforming  the  representation  of  tlie  people,  which 
has  recently  passed  this  House.  Notice  was  also  given 
of  a  motion  for  a  call  of  the  House.  On  the  next  daj^, 
accordingly,  Lord  Ebrington  made  his  motion,  and  was 
opposed  by  Mr.  Baring,  who  said  that  if  the  opposition 
had  been  imputed  to  personal  motives,  he  would  only 
ask  those  who  made  such  an  imputation  to  look  to  the 
fact  that  almost  all  the  members  of  the  Government 
opposite  had  been  opposed  to  reform,  except  the  noble 
Lord  (Lord  John  Eussell),  and  there  was  hardly  a 
public  man  in  the  country,  and  more  particularly  in  the 
King's  councils,  who  had  not,  at  one  time  or  another, 
been  opposed  to  such  a  sweeping  measure  of  reform  as 
that  introduced  by  his  Majesty's  Government.  Mr. 
Baring  pretended  to  be  ignorant  of  the  causes  of  the 
resignation  of  the  Ministers.  In  answer  to  this  asser- 
tion. Lord  Althorp  gave  a  clear  and  manly  statement 
of  the  causes  which  had  induced  the  Ministers  to  resign. 
'  I  stated  last  night,'  he  said,  '  that  the  advice  which  we 
gave  was  occasioned  by  our  finding  that  it  was  impossi- 
ble to  carry  the  Reform  Bill.  We,  therefore.  Sir,  asked 
his  Majesty  to  enable  us  to  take  such  steps  as  were  nec- 
essary to  carry  the  bill ;  and  to  carry  it  where.  Sir  ? 
Why,  in  the  House  of  Lords.  That  was  the  statement 
which  I  made  last  night.  But  as  my  hon.  friend  does 
not  think  that  was  enough,  I  have  no  objection  to  state, 
for  his  better  satisfaction,  that  the  advice  which  we 
thought  it  our  duty  to  offer  to  his  Majesty  was,  that  he 
should  create  a  number  of  peers  sufficient  to  carry  the 
Reform  Bill  through  the  other  House  of  Parliament  in 
an  efficient  form.'  A  division  took  place  the  same  night, 
when  there  appeared  for  the  motion,  288 ;  noes,  208  ; 
majority,  80.  Before  the  debate  began,  the  Sheriff  and 
Remembrancer  of  the  city  of  London  had  presented  a 


86  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

petition  from  the  city,  praying  the  House  to  stop  the 
supplies  till  the  Reform  Bill  was  passed.  On  the  next 
day,  May  11,  Mr.  John  Wood  presented  a  petition  from 
Manchester,  which,  he  said,  was  signed  in  the  space  of 
three  hours  by  25,000  persons,  and  which,  he  believed, 
would  be  followed  by  thousands  of  other  petitions,  pray- 
ing the  House  not  to  vote  any  supplies  until  a  measure 
essential  to  the  happiness  of  the  people  and  the  safety  of 
the  throne  shall  be  carried  into  a  law. 

The  excitement  continued  to  increase.  At  a  meet- 
ing at  Brooks's  Club,  Mr.  Stanley  made  a  most  violent 
speech  against  the  formation  of  a  Ministry  which  was 
not  prepared  to  carry  the  Reform  Bill  in  its  integrity. 

This  occurrence  is  said  to  have  taken  place  on  Satur- 
day, the  12th.  I  was  not  present  at  the  meeting.  On 
Monday,  the  14th,  the  Ministry  of  the  Duke  of  Welling- 
ton was  nipped  in  the  bud  in  the  House  of  Commons. 
After  a  debate  upon  a  petition  which  had  been  passed 
at  a  meeting  of  the  livery  of  the  city  of  London,  in  the 
Common  Hall  assembled,  in  which  debate  Mr.  Baring, 
Lord  Al thorp.  Sir  Henry  Hardinge,  Lord  Palmerston, 
and  the  Attorney-General  spoke.  Sir  Robert  Inglis  rose. 
He  said,  *  that  while  he  held,  as  an  old  Tory,  that  the 
King  had  the  same  right  to  give  his  decision  on  any 
measure  which  might  pass  the  two  Houses,  he  could  not 
forget  also  this  other  great  constitutional  truth,  that  the 
opinions  and  wishes  of  the  King  were  known  to  the 
House  in  no  other  way  than  by  his  public  acts,  for 
which  his  known  confidential  advisers  were  responsible. 
He  was  told  that  the  new  Government  was  actually  to 
take  charge,  had,  indeed,  already  taken  charge,  of  the 
Reform  Bill. 

*  He  was  willing  to  make  the  greatest  allowance  for 
changes  of  opinion  in  young  men ;  but,  when  he  was 


REFORM  BILL,  MAY  14.  87 

told  of  men  of  mature  age  —  statesmen  who  all  their 
lives  had  been  opposed  to  a  particular  measure,  who 
had  in  April  protested  against  it  as  revolutionary,  adopt- 
ing it  and  making  it  their  own  measure  in  May,  he  must 
own  that  he  could  imagine  no  consideration  which  could 
justify  such  a  change  of  conduct.  He  did  not  accuse 
any  one  of  love  of  pelf,  or  even  of  power  ;  he  did  not  say 
that  ambition,  that  last  infirmity  of  noble  minds,  had 
misled  any  one  :  but  the  conduct  itself,  from  whatever 
motive,  he  must  deprecate  as  fatal  to  that  singleness 
and  consistency  of  public  character  which,  as  he  had 
already  stated,  he  considered  to  be  the  best  property  of 
public  men,  and,  in  them,  of  their  country.'  Sir  Robert 
Inglis's  character,  universally  respected,  added  great 
weight  to  these  words,  and,  when  it  became  quite  clear 
that  the  new  Government  would  neither  be  joined  by 
Sir  Robert  Peel  nor  supported  by  Sir  Robert  Inglis,  Mr. 
Baring  saw  that  his  task  was  hopeless.  Accordingly, 
before  the  end  of  the  night,  he  intimated  clearly  that 
the  attempt  would  not  be  proceeded  with,  and  that  he 
wished  to  see  the  former  Ministers  resume  their  offices. 
In  reviewing  these  events,  it  is  impossible  to  refuse  to 
the  Duke  of  Wellington  the  tribute  at  all  times  due  to 
him  of  having  acted  from  conscientious  motives  and  a 
high  sense  of  honor.  But  while  the  Duke  of  Welling- 
ton was  actuated  only  by  undeviating  loyalty  to  his 
Sovereign  —  and  it  is  not  surprising  that  this  feeling 
should  take  deep  root  in  the  mind  of  a  military  man 
used  to  obedience  as  a  soldier,  and  attached  to  the 
throne  —  it  was  indeed  strange  that  Mr.  Baring  and 
others  should  have  supposed  that  to  such  a  principle 
could  be  sacrificed  the  character  of  a  public  man,  and 
the  Constitution  of  these  realms.  I  had  stated  in  the 
debate  of  the  12th  that  if  a  Cabinet  was  formed  it  would 


88  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

be  a  Cabinet  into  which  honor  could  not  enter.  I  ought 
to  have  excepted  the  Duke  of  Wellington.  The  failure 
of  this  attempt  to  set  aside  the  very  basis  of  the  Con- 
stitution was  a  happy  event,  on  which  the  House  of 
Commons  might  justly  pride  itself. 

As  soon  as  the  Duke  of  Wellington  perceived,  from 
the  discussions  in  the  House  of  Commons,  that  it  was 
impossible  to  form  a  Government  which  would  obtain 
the  confidence  of  the  country,  he  felt  it  his  duty  to 
report  that  he  could  not  fulfil  the  commission  with 
which  his  Majesty  had  been  pleased  to  honor  him. 
The  King  thereupon  resolved  to  renew  his  communica- 
tions with  his  former  Ministry. 

When  Lord  Grey  received  this  communication,  he 
merely  informed  the  King  that  he  was  aware  that  the 
Duke  of  Wellington  had  failed  in  forming  a  Ministry, 
and  that  he  would  consult  his  former  colleagues  on  the 
state  of  affairs. 

When  the  Cabinet  assembled,  very  serious  discussions 
took  place.  It  was  unanimously  resolved  that  the  bill 
must  be  carried  in  its  integrity,  and  the  question  was, 
how  this  object  was  to  be  effected.  It  was  understood 
that  Sir  Herbert  Taylor,  on  the  part  of  the  King,  would 
use  the  royal  influence,  and  that  the  Duke  of  Welling- 
ton, on  his  part,  would  do  allin  his  power  to  induce  the 
peers  to  abstain  from  further  opposition  to  the  bill. 
Sir  Herbert  Taylor  was  very  active  in  concert  with 
others  in  reconciling  the  King  to  a  course  which,  al- 
though it  did  not  directly  overpower  the  House  of 
Lords  by  a  large  creation  of  peers,  yet,  upon  this  occa- 
sion, and  on  a  question  of  the  gravest  importance, 
absolutely  destroyed  their  privileges  as  a  House  of 
Parliament,  and  reduced  them  to  a  cipher  in  the  work- 
ing of  the  Constitution. 


REFORM  ACT  — ROYAL  ASSENT,  1832.  89 

But  the  Cabinet  was  not  satisfied  with  the  probable 
effect  of  the  influences  thus  brought  to  bear  upon  the 
peers ;  they  thought  it  necessary  that  Lord  Grey  should 
be  armed  with  the  power  to  create  peers  in  a  number 
sufficient  to  carry  the  bill,  should  any.  of  its  essential 
provisions  be  interfered  with  in  its  further  progress 
through  the  House  of  Lords.  It  was  not  until  the 
King  had  given  to  Lord  Grey  his  solemn  promise  that, 
if  called  upon,  he  would  create  peers  in  a  sufficient 
number  for  this  purpose,  that  the  Ministers  consented 
to  resume  their  offices.^ 

Lord  Althorp,  in  announcing  the  restoration  of  the 
Ministry,  said  he  could  not  reveal  the  nature  of  the 
securities  for  carrying  the  bill  which  Lord  Grey  and 
his  colleagues  had  obtained,  but  that  he  trusted  the 
House  had  sufficient  confidence  in  him  to  be  satisfied 
with  his  assurance  that  they  had  that  security. 

After  this  the  bill  passed  triumphantly  through 
committee  without  much  debate,  and  with  no  impor- 
tant alteration.  It  was  read  a  third  time  by  a  majority 
of  eighty.  The  Reform  Bill  received  the  royal  assent 
on  June  T,  1832.  A  Boundary  Bill,  complicated  in  its 
details,  was  successfully  carried  through  both  Houses. 
The  Reform  Bills  for  Scotland  and  Ireland  were  like- 
wise carried,  and  on  August  16  Parliament  was  pro- 
rogued. 

A  session  more  successful  for  the  Ministry  could  not 
well  have  been.     The  manly  and  straightforward  con- 
duct of  Lord 
received  from  the  people,  overcame  all 

It  may  be  a  question,  however,  whether  the  manner 


Q.     ihe  manly  and  straightiorward  con- 
Grey,  and  the  enthusiastic  support  he  / 
]he  people,  overcame  all  opposition.  / 


1  See  '  Correspondence  of  King  William  IV.  and  Earl  Grey/  vol.  ii. 
p.  464. 


90  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

in  which  the  vote  of  the  House  of  Lords  was  nullified 
by  the  compulsory  absence  of  a  great  many  of  the 
majority,  was  not  more  perilous  for  their  authority 
than  the  creation  of  peers  which  the  Cabinet  of  Lord 
Grey  proposed.  In  the  reign  of  Queen  Anne  there 
had  been  a  decided  majority  in  the  House  of  Lords 
which  had  interfered  so  far  with  the  royal  prerogative 
as  to  address  the  Queen  not  to  consent  to  any  peace 
which  should  leave  the  Crown  of  Spain  in  the  possession 
of  any  branch  of  the  House  of  Bourbon.  This  was  a 
most  unconstitutional  interference  with  the  prerogative 
of  the  Crown,  and  the  discretion  of  its  advisers,  who 
could  not  fail  to  be  influenced  by  the  events  of  the  war. 
The  Tory  Minister  of  that  day,  strong  in  the  confidence 
of  the  Queen  and  of  the  country,  obtained  from  the 
Crown  the  creation  of  a  sufficient  number  of  peers  to 
overbear  the  majority,  and  secure  the  harmonious 
working  of  the  Constitution.  In  those  days,  when  the 
House  of  Peers  was  not  crowded  by  the  host  of  parti- 
sans who  were  added  to  it  by  Mr.  Pitt  and  his  succes- 
sors, the  creation  of  twelve  peers  was  sufficient  for  the 
purpose  of  Harley  and  St.  John ;  but  whether  twelve 
or  one  hundred  be  the  number  requisite  to  enable  the 
peers  to  give  their  votes  in  conformity  with  public 
opinion,  it  seems  to  me  that  a  House  of  Lords  sympa- 
thizing with  the  people  at  large,  and  acting  in  concur- 
rence with  the  enlightened  state  of  the  prevailing  wish, 
represents  far  better  the  dignity  of  the  House,  and  its 
share  in  legislation,  than  a  majority  got  together  by  the 
long  supremacy  of  one  party  in  the  State,  eager  to  show 
its  ill-will  by  rejecting  bills  of  small  importance,  but 
afraid  to  appear,  and  skulking  in  clubs  and  country 
houses,  in  face  of  a  measure  which  has  attracted  the 
ardent  sympathy  of  public  opinion. 


COERCION  BILL,  IRELAND,  1833.  91 

Yet  such  was  tlie  state  in  whicli  the  House  of  Lords 
was  left  by  the  forbearance  and  regard  for  royal  scru- 
ples of  Lord  Grey  and  his  colleagues.  Mr.  Pitt,  in  a 
few  years,  had  advised  the  creation  of  one  hundred 
peers.  Lord  Liverpool  had  sanctioned  the  creation  of 
fifteen  in  a  single  day.  Lord  Grey,  on  succeeding  to 
power  in  1830,  found  in  the  House  of  Peers  a  majority 
of  at  least  eighty  party  adherents  arrayed  against  him. 
After  the  Reform  Bill  had  been  carried,  this  majority 
was  held  back  with  scrupulous  care  by  the  Duke  of 
Wellington,  but  it  was  unscrupulously  .emploj^ed  by 
Lord  Lyndhurst  to  stop  the  course  of  wholesome  legis- 
lation, and  to  nip  in  the  bud  measures  which,  while 
they  were  useful,  were  at  the  same  time  unpretending, 
and  were  not  likely  to  rouse  popular  enthusiasm,  or  to 
justify  in  the  eyes  of  the  country  a  large  addition  to  the 
House  of  Lords. 

After  the  passing  of  the  Reform  Act,  a  duty  of  the 
highest  importance,  of  the  gravest  responsibility,  but  at 
the  same  time  of  the  clearest  necessity,  devolved  upon 
the  Government. 

The  long  war  in  which  England  had  been  engaged 
had  brought  with  it  immense  .  burdens,  an  enormous 
debt,  an  inconvertible  currency,  an  entire  derangement 
of  the  relations  between  capital  and  labor,  and  an 
abuse  of  the  poor-laws  which  had  placed  the  rural 
population  in  a  state  of  idleness  and  discontent,  and 
threatened  to  absorb  alb  the  funds  of  the  land-owners 
and  farmers.  To  these  permanent  disorders  was  to  be 
added  a  condition  of  Ireland  destructive  of  life  and 
property,  which  urgently  required  immediate  remedies. 

Of  these  evils,  the  last,  as  being  the  most  urgent, 
required  the  earliest  attention.  A  measure  of  coercion 
containing  very  strong  provisions  was  sent  over  by  the 


92  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

Government  of  Ireland.  Lord  Grey  accepted  it,  be- 
cause, in  his  opinion,  the  protection  of  life  and  property 
was  a  duty  incumbent  upon  every  Government.  Lord 
Althorp  accepted  it  also,  because,  in  his  opinion,  the 
stronger  the  measure  the  more  likely  was  it  to  be  tem- 
porary, and  to  give  way  after  a  short  time  to  the  resto- 
ration of  the  ordinary  law.  But  while  Lord  Althorp 
was  as  fully  persuaded  as  any  member  of  the  Cabinet 
of  the  necessity  for  this  bill,  he  was  little  fitted  to  per- 
suade a  Liberal  House  of  Commons  to  acquiesce  in  a 
proposal  repugnant  to  their  dispositions,  and  at  variance 
with  their  settled  opinions.  It  was  thought  right,  how- 
ever, that  he,  as  the  leader  of  the  Government  in  the 
House  of  Commons,  should  introduce  the  Coercion  Bill. 
He  did  so  in  a  manner  tame  and  ineffective.  His  detail 
of  the  outrages  committed  in  Ireland  was  like  reading 
a  few  of  the  blackest  pages  of  the  '  Newgate  Calendar.' 
The  Liberal  majority  were  disappointed,  sullen,  and 
ready  to  break  out  into  mutiny  against  their  chief. 
Mr.  Stanley,  who  was  sitting  next  to  me,  greatly  an- 
noyed at  the  aspect  of  the  House,  said  to  me,  '  I  meant 
not  to  have  spoken  till  to-morrow  night,  but  I  find  I 
must  speak  to-night.'  He  took  Lord  Althorp's  box  of 
official  papers,  and  went  upstairs  to  a  room  where  he 
could  look  over  them  quietly.  After  the  debate  had 
proceeded  for  two  or  three  hours  longer,  with  no  change 
of  temper  in  the  House,  Stanley  rose.  He  explained 
with  admirable  clearness  the  insecure  and  alarming  state 
of  Ireland.  He  then  went  over,  case  by  case,  the  more 
dreadful  of  the  outrages  which  had  been  committed. 
Ho  detailed,  with  striking  effect,  the  circumstances 
attending  the  murder  of  a  clergyman,  and  the  agony  of 
his  widow,  who,  after  seeing  her  husband  murdered, 
had  to  bear  the  terror  of  running  knocks  at  the  door, 


LORD   STANLEY.  93 

kept  on  all  night  by  the  miscreants  who  had  committed 
the  crime.  The  House  became  appalled  and  agitated 
at  the  dreadful  picture  which  he  placed  before  their 
eyes ;  they  felt  for  the  sorrows  of  the  innocent ;  they 
were  shocked  at  the  dominion  of  assassins  and  robbers. 
When  he  had  produced  a  thrilling  effect  by  these 
descriptions,  he  turned  upon  O'Connell,  who  led  the 
opposition  to  the  measure,  and  who  seemed  a  short 
time  before  about  to  achieve  a  triumph  in  favor  of 
sedition  and  anarchy.  He  recalled  to  the  recollection 
of  the  House  of  Commons,  that  at  a  recent  public 
meeting,  O'Connell  had  spoken  of  the  House  of  Com- 
mons as  six  hundred  and  fifty-eight  scoundrels.  In  a 
tempest  of  scorn  and  indignation,  he  excited  the  anger 
of  the  men  thus  designated  against  the  author  of  the 
calumny.  The  House,  which  two  hours  before  seemed 
about  to  yield  to  the  great  agitator,  was  now  almost 
ready  to  tear  him  to  pieces.  In  the  midst  of  the  storm 
which  his  eloquence  had  raised,  Stanley  sat  down, 
having  achieved  one  of  the  greatest  triumphs  ever  won 
in  a  popular  assembly  by  the  powers  of  oratory. 

On  February  12,  a  bill  was  brought  into  the  House 
of  Commons  by  Lord  Althorp,  for  the  reform  of  the 
Church  of  Ireland.  Ten  bishoprics  were  to  be  sup- 
pressed, the  Church-rates  entirely  abolished,  and  ar- 
rangements made  for  the  transfer  to  other  districts  of 
the  income  of  benefices  where  divine  service  had  not 
been  performed  for  three  years.  Three  members  of 
the  Cabinet,  Lord  Althorp,  Lord  Durham,  and  I,  had 
wished  to  transfer  some  of  the  revenues  of  the  Estab- 
lished Church  to  general  purposes  of  education  ;  but 
Lord  Grey  having  declared  himself  strongly  against 
any  such  provision  in  the  bill.  Lord  Althorp  gave  way, 
and  Lord  Durham  and  I  followed   his  example.     But 


94  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

the  difference  of  opinion  which  was  at  this  time  stifled 
broke  out  with  irresistible  force  in  the  following  year. 

The  year  1833  was,  in  my  opinion,  the  most  dis- 
tinguished and  the  most  memorable  of  Lord  Derby's 
political  career.  In  the  course  of  the  discussions  which 
arose  upon  the  subject  of  slavery  in  the  West  Indies, 
Lord  Grey  had  thought  it  desirable  that  Mr.  Stanley 
should  be  transferred  from  his  post  in  Ireland  to  the 
office  of  Secretary  of  State  for  the  Colonies,  and  the 
measure  for  the  abolition  of  slavery  fell,  consequently, 
into  his  hands.  But  he  was  not  thereby  freed  from 
the  responsibility  of  mastering  and  defending  the  details 
of  the  Irish  Church  Temporalities  Bill ;  and,  therefore, 
besides  the  Irish  Coercion  Bill,  which  he  had  carried 
by  the  force  of  his  eloquence,  he  had  to  conduct 
through  Parliament  and  defend,  clause  by  clause,  the 
Irish  Church  Temporalities  Bill  and  the  Colonial  Sla- 
very Abolition  Bill,  two  of  the  largest  and  most  important 
measures  that  were  ever  proposed  for  the  consideration 
of  Parliament.  He  performed  these  tasks  with  infinite 
skill,  readiness,  and  ability;  and,  for  my  part,  I  felt  and 
expressed  to  my  friend  the  Duke  of  Richmond  the 
opinion  which  I  firmly  entertained,  that  whenever  Lord 
Althorp  should  retire,  or,  by  his  father's  death,  be  re- 
moved to  the  House  of  Lords,  Mr.  Stanley  would  be 
fully  qualified  to  assume  his  place  as  leader  of  the 
Liberal  party  in  the  House  of  Commons.  It  will  be 
seen  how  subsequent  events  destroyed  this  prospect, 
and  produced  a  disastrous  rupture  in  the  Ministry. 

In  the  year  1834,  Parliament  met  early  in  February. 
The  King  remarked  in  his  speech,  that  during  the  last 
session  more  numerous  and  more  important  questions 
were  brought  under  the  consideration  of  Parliament 
than  during  any  former  period  of  similar  duration.     In 


POOR  LAWS.  95 

fact,  the  embarrassment  of  the  Government  and  of  Par- 
liament arose  rather  from  the  abundance  of  subjects 
and  the  difliculty  of  considering  them  in  due  order,  than 
from  any  want  of  diligence  either  on  the  part  of  the 
Ministry  or  of  the  House  of  Commons.  In  the  royal 
speech,  attention  was  called  to  the  state  of  the  munici- 
pal corporations,  to  the  administration  and  effect  of  the 
poor-laws,  and  to  ecclesiastical  revenues  and  patronage 
in  England  and  in  Wales.  With  respect  to  Ireland, 
the  King  recommended  the  early  consideration  of  such 
a  final  adjustment  of  the  tithes  in  that  part  of  the 
United  Kingdom  as  might  extinguish  all  just  causes  of 
complaint  without  injury  to  the  rights  and  property  of 
any  class  of  subjects,  or  to  any  institution  in  Church  or 
State.  These  subjects  occupied  four  or  five  years,  and 
their  consideration  was  constantly  interrupted  by  topics 
of  immediate  interest,  by  events  connected  with  foreign 
policy,  and  by  the  impatience  of  the  more  eager  reform- 
ers to  introduce  into  debate  proposals  of  change  which 
would  have  required  fifteen  or  twenty  sessions  to  deal 
with.  Besides  these  topics,  there  were  other  proposals, 
compliance  with  which  would  either  have  been  incon- 
sistent with,  the  due  faith  to  be  observed  to  the  Crown, 
or  injurious  to  the  interests  of  the  country. 

Among  the  subjects  recommended  to  consideration 
in  the  King's  speech,  there  was  none  more  urgent  or 
more  important  than  the  reform  of  the  Poor-laws.  A 
commission  had  been  appointed  upon  this  subject,  and 
their  labors  had  for  result  a  valuable  report,  which 
formed  matter  for  anxious  deliberation  in  a  committee 
of  the  Cabinet  of  which  Lord  Althorp  was  the  principal 
member.  Lord  Brougham  did  not  attend  the  commit- 
tee, but  took  much  interest  in  the  subject.  The  report 
of  the  Commissioners  of  Enquiry  was  presented  to  the 


96  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

Government  in  February,  1834,  and  on  April  17  of  that 
year  Lord  Althorp  introduced  a  bill  into  the  House  of 
Commons.  This  bill  underwent  much  discussion,  and 
had  to  encounter  a  violent,  though  by  no  means  a 
party,  opposition  in  the  House  of  Commons.  But  the 
patience,  the  good  sense,  the  practical  experience, 
the  unremitting  labor,  and  the  just  influence  of  Lord 
Althorp  overcame  the  obstacles  which  ignorance,  preju- 
dice, and  the  violent  opposition  of  a  person  of  much 
influence  in  the  press,  interposed  against  this  great 
measure.  The  bill  was  sent  to  the  House  of  Lords 
July  1,  and  received  the  royal  assent  August  14  of 
this  year. 

Increase  of  the  amount  raised  for  poor-rates  had  been 
enormous  in  three-quarters  of  a  century.  In  1748,  '49, 
'50,  the  average  amount  raised  within  the  year  for  poor- 
rates  and  county  rates  was  730,000Z.  In  1775,  it  was 
1,720,000?.  In  1801,  the  sums  expended  for  the  relief 
of  the  poor  exceeded  4,000,000?.  In  1811,  these  sums 
exceeded  6,600,000?.  In  1821,  they  amounted  to  6,959,- 
000?. ;  in  1831,  to  6,798,000? ;  and  in  1832,  to  upwards 
of  7,000,000?. 

But  within  three  years  after  the  passing  of  the  new 
law  the  decrease  was  equally  remarkable.  In  1837, 
poor-rates  amounted  only  to  4,000,000?.,  and  in  the 
years  1838  and  1839,  they  did  not  reach  4,500,000?.  It 
cannot  be  denied,  however,  that  the  sound  principles 
inculcated  by  the  commissioners  of  1834  have  been  re- 
laxed in  practice  by  the  ignorance,  the  carelessness,  or 
the  fear  of  unpopularity,  which  have  checked  the  due 
administration  of  the  law.  With  respect  to  other  sub- 
jects, but  little  progress  was  made ;  and  dissensions  in 
the  Ministry  produced  a  fatal  effect  on  the  union  of  the 
Cabinet.    I  have  already  stated  that,  on  the  subject  of 


CHURCH  OF  IRELAND.  97 

the  Irish  Church,  I  had  the  misfortune  to  differ  from 
Mr.  Stanley,  and  on  May  6,  after  Stanley  had  spoken, 
and  had  declared  that  he  adhered  to  his  former  opinions, 
I  made  the  following  statement :  '  With  respect  to  the 
proposition  of  the  hon.  and  learned  member,  that  one- 
fifth  of  the  composition  should  be  paid  out  of  the  pub- 
lic revenue,  he  was  quite  certain  that  this  contribution 
of  the  nation  would  be  entirely  thrown  away,  unless 
some  new  principle  were  established  by  Parliament  with 
regard  to  appropriation.  Upon  the  subject  of  appro- 
priation, the  hon.  and  learned  member  for  Tipperary 
alluded,  the  other  night,  to  an  opinion  which  he  (Lord 
John  Russell)  gave,  when  out  of  office,  which  the  hon. 
and  learned  member  said  was  contrarj^  to  the  opinion 
he  had  since  given  when  in  office.  But  the  only  opinion 
he  had  ever  given  on  this  subject,  when  out  of  office, 
was  by  giving  a  silent  vote  in  favor  of  a  motion  made 
by  the  hon,  member  for  Middlesex.  He  did  not  under- 
stand that  this  bill  contained  any  proposition  on  that 
subject.  As  he  understood  it,  the  object  of  this  bill 
was  to  ascertain  and  secure  the  amount  of  the*  tithe. 
The  question  of  appropriation  was  to  be  kept  entirely 
distinct.  If  the  object  of  the  bill  were  to  grant  a  cer- 
tain sum  to  the  Established  Church  of  Ireland,  and  the 
question  were  to  end  there,  his  opinion  of  it  might  be 
very  different.  But  he  understood  it  to  be  a  bill  to 
secure  a  certain  amount  of  property  and  revenue  des- 
tined by  the  State  to  religious  and  charitable  purposes  ; 
and  if  the  State  should  find  that  it  was  not  appropriated 
justly  to  the  purposes  of  religious  and  moral  instruction, 
for  which  such  revenues  were  intended,  when  given  to 
any  Church  Establishment,  it  would  then  be  the  duty 
of  Parliament  to  consider  of  a  different  appropriation. 
His  opinion  upon  that  subject  was  declared  —  not  when 

7 


98  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

out  of  office,  but  when  in  office  —  and  that  opinion  was, 
that  the  revenues  of  the  Church  of  Ireland  were  larger 
than  necessary  for  the  religious  and  moral  instruction 
of  the  persons  belonging  to  that  Church,  and  for  the 
stability  of  the  Church  itself.  The  more  he  had  seen 
and  reflected  since,  the  more  had  that  opinion  been  con- 
firmed. He  did  not  think  it  would  be  advisable  or  wise 
to  mix  the  question  of  appropriation  with  the  question 
of  amount  of  the  revenues ;  but  when  Parliament  had 
vindicated  the  property  in  tithes,  he  should  then  be  pre- 
pared to  assert  his  opinion  with  regard  to  their  appro- 
priation ;  and  if,  when  the  revenue  was  once  secured, 
the  assertion  of  that  opinion  should  lead  him  to  differ 
and  separate  from  those  with  whom  he  was  united  by 
political  connection,  and  for  whom  he  entertained  the 
deepest  private  affection,  he  should  feel  much  regret ; 
yet,  considering  himself  pledged,  not  only  by  his  general 
duty  as  a  member  of  that  House,  but  by  the  resolution 
which  had  been  passed  the  other  day,  to  attend  to  the 
just  complaints  of  the  people  of  Ireland,  and  consider- 
ing that  if  there  ever  were  a  just  ground  of  complaint 
on  the  part  of  any  people  against  any  grievance,  it  was 
the  complaint  of  the  people  of  Ireland  against  the  pres- 
ent appropriation  of  tithes  —  he  should  then,  deeply 
lamenting  the  decision  he  should  feel  himself  bound  to 
come  to,  but  at  the  same  time  reflecting  that  he  had  to 
the  utmost  of  his  power  resisted  all  projects  for  the 
repeal  of  the  Union,  and  that  he  had,  by  the  support  he 
gave  to  this  and  former  bills  for  the  maintenance  of 
tithes,  vindicated  the  right  of  property  against  those 
who  wrongfully  withhold  them,  he  should,  at  whatever 
cost  and  sacrifice,  do  what  he  should  consider  his  boun- 
den  duty ;  namely,  do  justice  to  Ireland.' 

This  speech  was  prompted  by  what  I  understood  to 


SPEECH  OE  LORD  JOHN  RUSSELL.  09 

be  a  declaration  of  Mr.  Stanley,  that  he  meant  to  perse- 
vere in  the  opinions  he  had  given  respecting  the  per- 
manence of  the  Church  of  Ireland,  and  I  thought  that 
if  that  declaration  were  received  in  silence  by  his  col- 
leagues, the  whole  Government  would  be  considered 
pledged   to   the  maintenance   of   the    revenues  of  the 
Church  of  Ireland,  undiminished.     I  do   not   find   in 
Hansard  any  such  declaration ;  but  it  was  strongly  fixed 
in  my  mind  at  the  time,  and  is  so  fixed  in  my. memory 
at  present.     Perhaps  Stanley's  words  were  not  so  per- 
emptory as  I  supposed ;  perhaps  the  words  he  uttered 
have  been  omitted  in  the  reports.     Be  that  as  it  may, 
my  speech  made  a  great  impression,  the  cheering  was 
loud  and  general,  and  Stanley  pronounced  his  sense  of 
it  in  a  well-known  note  to  Sir  James  Graham  :  '  Johnny 
has  upset  the  coach.'     When  the  Cabinet   next   met, 
much  dissatisfaction  was  expressed ;  some  wished  me  to 
retract  what  I  had  said,  but  that  I  positively  refused  to 
do.     Lord  Althorp  testified  to  the  hearty  cheering  from 
all  sides  of  the  House  of  the  Liberal  party.  The  question 
of  the  Irish  Church  was  evidently  advancing  to  a  crisis. 
Eedress  was  not  immediately  granted ;  justice  was  not 
done  then ;  but  a  commencement  had  been  made,  and 
that  which  was  not  performed  at  the  Union  by  Pitt,  and 
which  the  Duke  of  Wellington  and  Sir  Robert  Peel  left 
undone  in  1829,  was  yet  to  be  accomplished.   Mr.  Ward 
did  not  fail  to  bring  forward  a  motion  upon  the  Irish 
Church.     He  quoted  the  opinions  of  Lord  Brougham, 
and  those  which  Lord  Althorp  had  stated  in  1824.     He 
ended  with  the  following  motion  :  '  That  the  Protestant 
Episcopal  Establishment  in  Ireland  exceeds  the  spiritual 
wants  of  the  Protestant  population :  and  that,  it  being 
the  riglit  of  the  State  to  regulate  the  distribution  of 
Church  property  in  such  manner  as  Parliament  may 


100  KECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

determine,  it  is  the  opinion  of  this  House  that  the  tem- 
poral possessions  of  the  Church  of  Ireland,  as  now 
established  by  law,  ought  to  be  reduced.'  The  debate 
was  interrupted  after  the  motion  had  been  seconded  by 
Mr.  Grote,  who  said  that  when  the  advocates  for  the 
repeal  of  the  Union  put  forward  the  evils  arising  from 
the  Irish  Church  Establishment,  no  man  replied  to  them. 
He  continued :  '  When  the  magnanimity  of  England  in 
her  conduct  to  Scotland,  as  compared  with  her  conduct 
to  Ireland,  with  regard  to  their  respective  Churches,  Avas 
urged,  no  man  replied  to  them ;  and  why  ?  Because 
no  reasonable  answer  could  be  given  to  such  objections. 
The  first  step  towards  the  reform  of  an  abuse  was  to  lay 
down  a  good  principle  ;  such  a  principle  was  laid  down 
in  this  motion,  and,  as  a  first  step,  he  earnestly  hoped 
that  the  House  would  concur  in  it.'  After  this  speech. 
Lord  Althorp  rose  and  spoke  to  the  following  effect : 
*  Since  my  hon.  friend  who  rose  to  support  this  motion 
commenced  his  address,  circumstances  have  come  to  my 
knowledge  which  induce  me  to  move  that  the  further 
debate  upon  this  subject  be  adjourned  to  Monday  next. 
I  cannot  now  state  what  those  circumstances  are,  but  I 
hope  the  House  has  sufficient  confidence  in  me  (the 
noble  Lord  was  interrupted  by  loud  and  long-continued 
cheering  from  all  parts  of  the  House)  —  I  hope,  I  repeat, 
that  the  House  will  have  sufficient  confidence  in  me  to 
believe  that  I  would  not  make  such  a  proposition  unless 
I  were  convinced  of  its  propriety.  I  now  move  that  the 
further  debate  on  this  motion  bo  adjourned  to  Monday 
next.' 

On  the  ^londay  following,  it  was  well  known  that 
four  members  of  the  Cabinet,  and  those  among  the 
most  important,  had  resigned.  The  Cabinet,  previously 
to  their  taking  this  step,  had  resolved  on  advising  the 


RESIGNATION  OF  FOUR  CABINET  MINISTERS.     101 

Crown  to  appoint  a  commission  to  inquire  into  the 
revenues  of  the  Church  of  Ireland,  and  the  number  of 
members  belonging  to  that  Church,  compared  with  the 
whole  population  of  Ireland.  The  consequence  was, 
the  resignation  of  the  Earl  of  Kipon,  Lord  Privy  Seal, 
Mr.  Stanley,  Secretary  of  State  for  the  Colonies,  Sir 
James  Graham,  First  Lord  of  the  Admiralty,  and  the 
Duke  of  Richmond,  Postmaster-General.  The  issuing 
of  this  commission  wa^  considered  by  these  four  mem- 
bers of  the  Cabinet  as  a  preliminary  step  towards  the 
partial  disendowment  of  the  Established  Church  of 
Ireland.  The  motives  of  the  seceders  were  thus 
explained  by  the  Earl  of  Ripon,  on  June  6,  in  the 
House  of  Lords,  in  answer  to  a  speech  of  Lord  Grey: 
*  As  his  noble  friend  (Lord  Grey)  had  correctly  stated, 
the  proposition  to  appoint  a  commission  arose  out  of 
peculiar  circumstances,  and  was  not  taken  up  suddenly. 
The  question  was  deeply  considered,  and  certainly 
great  objections  were  felt  by  himself,  as  well  as  by  his 
colleagues,  to  the  adoption  of  that  measure.  He  had 
no  particular  desire  to  avail  himself  of  the  compliment 
that  had  been  paid  to  himself  and  his  colleagues,  in 
adverting  to  their  having  been  described  as  the  "  drags  " 
of  the  Government  of  which  they  were  members ; 
but  he  might  remark  that  possibly  they  had  been 
useful  "drags."  At  all  events,  he  certainly  did  feel, 
with  regard  to  the  commission,  that  if  he  assented  to  it, 
the  question  as  to  the  appropriation  of  the  revenues  of 
the  Church  to  secular  purposes  was  settled ;  and  when 
he  asked  himself  if  he  could  assent  to  such  a  proposi- 
tion, his  answer  was,  no.  He  thought  that  the  prin- 
ciple of  inquiry  into  the  state  of  the  population  of 
parishes,  to  ascertain  the  number  of  resident  Protestants 
therein,  as  compared  with  the  number  of  Catholics,  if 


102  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

it  meant  any  thing,  must  mean  something  that  had  a 
direct  tendency  to  effect  an  alteration  of  the  principles 
on  which  the  Church  Establishment  was  based.  His 
noble  friend  stated  that  he  did  not  contemplate  the 
possibility  of  any  great  change  as  the  result  of  appoint- 
ing the  commission;  but  it  was  because  he  (the  Earl 
of  Ripon)  believed  that  the  effect  of  the  commission 
must  be  to  alter  the  footing  on  which  the  EstabHshed 
Church  stood,  that  he  could  not  concur  in  that  prehmi- 
nary  step.'  Lord  Ripon  went  on  to  argue,  that  if  the 
revenue  of  the  Church  in  a  particular  parish  was  to  be 
regulated  by  the  number  of  the  Protestant  population 
in  that  parish,  then  they  destroyed  the  principle  on 
which  alone  the  Established  Church  existed. 

Such  was  the  commencement  of  the  contest  on  the 
subject  of  the  Established  Church  of  Ireland.  Had  it 
been  continued  in  every  session,  from  1834  to  the  present 
time,  a  period  of  thirty-five  (now  forty)  years,  it  is 
probable  that  little  progress  would  have  been  made ; 
parties  would  have  been  marshalled  against  each  other 
every  year,  and  popular  interest  on  the  subject  would 
have  languished,  and  perhaps  have  perished.  During 
the  truce  of  this  long  period,  discussion  has  taken  place, 
information  has  been  given,  floods  of  light  have  been 
poured  upon  the  subject ;  Parliament  has  divided  and 
disestablished  the  Protestant  Church  ;  and  public  opin- 
ion has  perceived  the  absurdity,  the  injustice,  and  the 
insult  of  a  monopoly  kept  up  for  the  benefit  of  one- 
eighth  of  the  population  of  Ireland,  and  repugnant  to 
the  sentiments  of  at  least  three-fourths  of  the  people. 

An  event  of  far  greater  importance  than  the  secessioa 
of  four  members  of  the  Cabinet,  important  as  that  was, 
occurred  in  the  same  session.  The  head  of  the  Cabinet 
himself  retired  from  oflBce,  and  thenceforth  took  little 


RESIGNATION  OF  EARL  GREY.        103 

part  in  public  life,  leaving,  however,  a  brilliant  example 
of  unstained  honor,  of  consistent  public  principle,  and  of 
success  in  legislation  achieved  in  strict  conformity  with 
the  principles  which,  in  conjunction  with  his  great 
leader,  Mr.  Fox,  he  had  always  strenuously  maintained. 
It  is  well  that  those  who  embrace  politics  as  the  occupa- 
tion of  their  lives  should  have  before  them  the  example 
of  two  such  men  as  Fox  and  Grey,  who  having  early  in 
life  distinguished  themselves  by  their  attachment  to  the 
cause  of  civil  and  religious  liberty,  of  peace  abroad  and 
of  reform  at  home,  should  have  persevered  in  those  sen- 
timents in  spite  of  the  proscription  of  a  court,  and  the 
mistaken  passions  of  a  people  —  should  have  vindicated 
in  Parliament  the  suppression  of  the  Slave  Trade,  the 
abolition  of  slavery  in  our  Colonies,  and  the  cause  of 
justice  in  Ireland,  together  with  all  those  measures  which 
flow  from  the  adoption  of  sound  principles,  maintained, 
during  many  years  of  political  contention,  and  cherished 
to  their  last  breath  with  unswerving  rectitude.  If  the 
seventeenth  century  saw,  in  Sunderland  and  Shaftes- 
bury, examples  of  selfishness  and  faction,  the  names  of 
Fox  and  Grey  should  ever  be  used  to  incite  men  who 
enter  public  life  to  keep  their  honor  unstained,  and  to 
look  to  the  welfare  of  their  country  as  the  object  of  all 
their  exertions. 

The  immediate  occasion  of  Lord  Grey's  retirement 
was  in  itself  not  very  creditable  to  those  by  whom  it  was 
caused.  Lord  Wellesley,  the  Lord  Lieutenant  of  Ireland, 
was  led  by  private  correspondence  to  suppose  that  he 
should  facilitate  the  course  of  the  Government  on  the 
Irish  Coercion  Bill  by  departing  partially  from  the  sen- 
timent he  had  expressed  in  a  public  dispatch  —  that 
political  agitation  and  rural  outrage  were  joined  together, 
'  by  one   unbroken   chain  of  indissoluble  connection.' 


104  RECOLLECTIONS  AND   SUGGESTIONS. 

Lord  Althorp,  in  a  manner  quite  inconsistent  with  his 
usual  guarded  conduct,  allowed  Mr.  Littleton,  Chief 
Secretary  of  Ireland,  to  inform  O'Connell  that  in  all 
probability  the  Cabinet  would  not  renew  the  Coercion 
Act  in  its  full  rigor.  When,  therefore.  Lord  Grey  pro- 
posed to  his  Cabinet  the  renewal  of  the  Coercion  Act 
without  alteration,  although  he  carried  with  him  a 
majority  of  his  colleagues,  he  was  strongly  opposed  by 
Lord  Althorp,  who  was  followed  by  Mr.  Grant,  Mr. 
Spring  Rice,  and  Mr.  Abercromby.  Upon  the  proposal 
being  made  in  the  House  of  Commons,  in  conformity 
with  the  opinion  of  the  majority,  O'Connell  referred,  in 
a  way  that  Lord  Althorp  could  not  misunderstand,  to 
the  assurances  he  had  received,  and  protested  with  his 
usual  power  and  eloquence  against  the  Government  pro- 
posal. Lord  Althorp  tliat  same  night  called  together 
those  who  had  agreed  with  him  in  the  Cabinet,  and  with 
their  concurrence  sent  his  resignation  to  Lord  Grey. 
Lord  Grey,  in  laying  this  letter  before  the  King,  accom- 
panied it  with  his  own  resignation.^ 

A  Cabinet  was  summoned  for  the  following  evening ; 
meeting  Lord  Melbourne  in  the  Park  he  said,  *  I  believe 
we  are  summoned  to-night  to  consider  a  decision  already 
made.'  At  the  meeting  of  the  Cabinet  in  the  evening, 
Lord  Grey  placed  before  us  the  letters  containing  his 


*  I  was  sitting  by  Lord  Altliorp  when  ho  announced,  after  O'Connell's 
speech,  in  his  own  homely  way,  his  resolution  to  resign.  *  The  pig's 
killed,'  lie  said.  A  porcine  illustration  was  not  new  in  our  history. 
"When  Henry  VIII.  was  considering  of  the  best  means  of  procuring  hU 
divorce  from  Catherine  of  Aragon,  he  gave  his  decision  in  favor  of  Cran- 
iner's  opinion  by  saying,  '  Cranmer  has  got  the  right  sow  by  the  car.' 
When  Sir  Robert  Walpole  was  asked  how  he  had  overcome  Sir  Spencer 
Compton,  to  whom  the  King  was  partial,  he  replied,  '  He  got  the  wrong 
sow  by  the  ear,  and  I  the  right.*  So  vulgar  and  idiomatic  are  the  phrases 
of  English  monarchs  and  ministers. 


LORD  ALTHORP.  105 

own  resignation,  and  that  of  Lord  Althorp,  which  he 
had  sent  early  in  the  morning  to  the  King.  He  like- 
wise laid  before  us  the  King's  gracious  acceptance  of  his 
resignation,  and  he  gave  to  Lord  Melbourne  a  sealed 
letter  from  his  Majesty.  Lord  Melbourne,  upon  opening 
tills  letter,  found  in  it  an  invitation  to  him  to  undertake 
the  formation  of  a  Government.  Seeing  that  nothing 
was  to  be  done  that  night,  I  left  the  Cabinet  and  went 
to  the  Opera. 

The  acceptance  of  Lord  Grey's  resignation  by  the 
King  was  somewhat  hurried  ;  there  was  no  Teason  why, 
upon  friendly  discussion  between  Lord  Grey  and  Lord 
Althorp,  the  difference  with  respect  to  the  clauses  in 
the  Coercion  Bill,  objected  to  by  Lord  Althorp,  should 
not  have  been  arranged.  The  whole  measure  was  at 
that  time  one  rather  of  precaution  than  of  urgency ; 
and  had  the  dangers  of  the  former  year  again  arisen, 
Parliament  might  have  been  called  upon  to  supply  the 
want  of  authority. 

But  the  King's  purpose  in  this  hasty  acceptance  soon 
became  apparent.  His  Majesty  desired  Lord  Melbourne 
to  consider  whether  the  Duke  of  Wellington  and  Sir 
Robert  Peel  might  not  be  invited  to  join  the  Adminis- 
tration. Lord  Melbourne,  who  was  very  averse  to  coali- 
tions, declined  in  positive,  though  very  courteous,  terms, 
to  undertake  any  such  task.  He  had  in  view  the  main- 
tenance of  the  Administration,  taking  himself  the  place 
of  Lord  Grey,  and  giving  Lord  Duncannon  the  Home 
Department.  Lord  Grey  asked  me,  at  the  levee,  whether 
I  had  any  objection  to  continue  in  office  under  Lord 
Melbourne  ?     I  told  him  I  had  not. 

But  the  great  difficulty  which  every  one  felt,  was 
how  to  secure  the  continuance  of  Lord  Althorp  in  his 
post   as  leader   of  the   House   of    Commons.     It  was 


106  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

obviou8  that  he  would  not  consent  to  the  renewal  of 
the  Coercion  Act,  unless  those  clauses  to  which  he  had 
objected  were  omitted.  But  there  was  a  still  greater 
difficulty ;  it  might  seem  that  Lord  Grey's  resignation 
was  forced  upon  him  by  Lord  Althorp,  and  that  Lord 
Althorp's  object  had  been  to  remain  in  office  himself 
without  Lord  Grey.  This  supposition  was  totally 
inconsistent  with  the  known  inclinations  and  wishes  of 
Lord  Althorp.  One  of  the  ministers  who  had  seceded 
on  the  question  of  the  Irish  Church,  said  to  me  that  if 
he  had  been  told  that  Lord  Althorp  had  engaged  in  an 
intrigue  to  get  out  of  office  he  might  have  believed  it, 
but  an  assertion  that  Lord  Althorp  had  intrigued  in 
order  to  remain  in  office  was  utterly  incredible.  In 
fact,  Lord  Althorp  detested  office,  and  it  was  only  at 
the  earnest  solicitation  of  his  friends,  the  leaders  of  the 
Liberal  party  in  the  House  of  Commons,  that  he  very 
reluctantly  consented  to  retain  his  official  position  under 
Lord  Melbourne.  He  told  me  that  every  morning  Avhen 
he  woke,  while  *he  was  in  office,  he  wished  himself  dead. 
His  acquiescence  thus  cost  him  a  painful  effort,  and  ho 
no  doubt  determined  at  this  time  that  if  any  event  should 
set  him  free,  he  would  never  again  take  office  upon  any 
terms. 

The  death  of  Lord  Spencer  put  this  resolution  to 
the  test.  Lord  Althorp  ceased  to  be  the  leader  of  the 
House  of  Commons,  and  no  entreaties  could  induce  liim 
to  accept,  as  a  peer,  the  post  of  Secretary  of  State  for 
the  Colonies.  Mr.  Spring  Rice  becoming  Chancellor  of 
the  Exchequer  in  his  place,  he  retired  for  ever  from 
public  life. 

There  had  been  an  impression  in  the  Liberal  party, 
that  no  one  but  Lord  Althorp  could  lead  the  party  in 
the  House  of  Commons,  and  the  difficulty  was  very 


DISMISSAL  OF  THE  MINISTRY.  107 

great.  Lord  Melbourne  informed  me  that  he  had  con- 
sulted all  his  colleagues,  and  that  each  had  said,  with 
more  or  less  warmth  of  expression,  that  I  was  the  per- 
son to  whom  that  position  should  be  offered.  Thus 
invited,  I  considered  it  my  duty  to  accept  the  task, 
though  I  told  Lord  Melbourne  that  I  could  not  expect 
to  have  the  same  influence  with  the  House  of  Commons 
which  Lord  Althorp  had  possessed.  In  conversation 
with  Mr.  Abercromb}^  I  said,  more  in  joke  than  in 
earnest,  that  if  I  were  offered  the  command  of  the 
Channel  fleet,  and  thought  it  my  duty  to  accept,  I  should 
not  refuse  it.  On  this  private  and  casual  remark,  Syd- 
ney Smith  afterwards  constructed  an  elaborate  charge  ; 
and  as  I  had  consented,  in  the  ecclesiastical  commission, 
to  a  proposal  that  the  patronage  of  the  deans  and  chap- 
ters should  be  transferred  to  the  bishops,  he  was  so 
angry  as  to  impute  to  me  a  want  of  feeling  with  which 
I  trust  I  am  not  justly  chargeable. 

Lord  Melbourne  went  to  Brighton,  and  proposed  to 
the  King  that  I  should  succeed  Lord  Althorp  as  leader 
in  the  House  of  Commons.  The  King  objected.'  Lord 
Melbourne  then  proposed  successively  the  names  of  Mr. 
Spring  Rice  and  Mr.  Abercromby.  But  the  King  ob- 
jected to  both ;  and  the  next  morning  gave  Lord  Mel- 
bourne a  written  paper,  saying  that  he  had  no  further 
occasion  for  his  services,  or  those  of  his  colleagues. 
Lord  Melbourne  returned  to  London  that  day,  bringing 
with  him  a  letter  for  the  Duke  of  WelUngton.  He  saw 
no  one  that  evening  but  Lord  Brougham  and  Lord 
Dun  cannon,  and  he  earnestly  impressed  upon  them 
the  importance  of  keeping  the  whole  matter  secret  till 
after  the  meeting  of  the  Cabinet,  which  was  fixed  for 
twelve  o'clock  on  the  following  day.  Before  that  time 
arrived,  however,  two  of  the  morning  newspapers,  the 


108  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

*  Times '  and  the  '  Morning  Chronicle,'  had  announced 
the  dismissal  of  the  Ministry,  and  the  '  Morning  Chron- 
icle '  added  to  the  announcement  the  words,  '  the  Queen 
has  done  it  all.'  This  comment  gave  just  offence  to  the 
King.  He  required  the  Duke  of  Wellington  to  deprive 
the  Ministers  at  once  of  their  offices.  Lord  Duncannon 
"was  interrupted  at  church,  during  the  time  of  divine 
service,  by  a  messenger  commanding  the  instant  delivery 
of  the  Seals  of  the  Home  Department.  The  Duke  of 
Wellington  recommended  that  a  messenger  should  be 
Bent  for  Sir  Robert  Peel,  who  was  at  Rome,  and  that 
to  him  should  be  entrusted  the  formation  of  a  new 
Administration. 

This  whole  proceeding  was  a  very  ill-judged  step 
on  the  part  of  the  King.  Whatever  might  ultimately 
be  the  views  of  Lord  Melbourne's  Ministry  on  the  Irish 
Church,  no  measure  upon  that  subject  had  hitherto 
been  matter  of  agreement,  or  even  of  deliberation  in  the 
Cabinet.  Lord  Melbourne  and  his  colleagues  possessed 
the  confidence  of  a  great  majority  of  the  House  of  Com- 
mons. If  no  one  of  the  Ministry  should  be  found 
to  inherit  the  confidence  so  freely  accorded  to  Lord 
Althorp,  that  fact  would  be  tested  by  debate  and  divi- 
sion in  the  House  of  Commons  itself.  If  the  measure 
which  the  Ministry  should  introduce  on  the  Irish  Church 
should  prove  in  the  opinion  of  the  House  of  Commons 
dangerous  or  impracticable,  the  vote  upon  that  subject 
would  involve  their  fall.  Thus  the  King  would  have 
been  relieved  from  responsibility ;  but  by  taking  upon 
himself  the  initiative,  he  naturally  offended  the  whole 
body  of  the  people,  who  considered  the  exercise  of  the 
royal  prerogative  an  act  of  caprice  rather  than  of  rea- 
sonable judgment.  Sir  Robert  Peel  was  placed  in  a 
most  unfavorable  position ;  and  he  aggravated  his  own 


NEW  PARLIAMENT.  109 

disadvantages  by  advising  an  immediate  dissolution. 
Had  lie  boldly  met  Parliament,  and  been  thwarted  in 
his  attempt  to  govern,  he  might  fairly  have  appealed  to 
the  country,  and  would  probably  have  had  a  majority 
in  his  favor. 

As  it  was,  the  very  large  majority  which  had  fol- 
lowed the  dissolution  of  1832  was  very  sensibly  di- 
minished, but  not  entirely  destroyed.  The  confidence 
placed  in  Sir  Robert  Peel,  and  the  fear  of  any  inter- 
ference with  the  Irish  Church,  were  the  chief  reasons 
of  the  diminished  number  of  the  Whig  members.  Still 
the  Liberal  party  had  a  clear  majority  on  the  elections, 
but  that  majority  consisted  of  every  shade,  from  the 
most  moderate  of  the  Whigs  to  the  most  resolute  of 
the  Radicals.  It  seemed  to  me,  as  commander-in-chief 
of  an  army  so  variously  composed,  that  they  could  not 
be  too  soon  brought  into  action,  and  that  motions  ought 
to  be  framed  in  which  the  whole  party  could  agree. 
With  this  view,  Mr.  Abercromby  was  proposed  as 
Speaker,  in  the  place  of  Mr.  Manners  Sutton,  and  was 
elected.  An  amendment  was  proposed  to  the  address, 
advising  a  popular  reform  of  corporations,  and  censur- 
ing the  dissolution,  the  only  act  of  importance  for 
which  the  Ministers  of  the  Crown  were  actually  as 
well  as  virtually  responsible.  This  amendment  was 
carried.  A  motion  for  constituting  an  unsectarian 
University  of  London  was  carried  by  a  majority  of 
eighty.  It  was  made  evident  that  Sir  Robert  Peel  had 
not  the  confidence  of  the  House  of  Commons.  His 
position,  therefore,  was  not  consistent  with  the  prin- 
ciples of  the  Constitution.  But  he  determined  to  re- 
main as  Minister  till  that  want  of  confidence  was 
shown  by  some  overt  act,  and  the  difficulty  was  to 
frame  a  resolution  by  which  a  proof  should  be  given 


110  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

that  the  Minister  was  not  supported  by  the  House  of 
Commons.  A  notion  prevailed,  even  among  Liberals, 
that  Sir  Robert  Peel  should  have  a  fair  trial,  —  an  ad- 
vantage which  had  been  denied  to  Lord  Melbourne. 
It  seemed  to  me  that  this  fair  trial  would  be  given, 
and  the  House  of  Commons  would  still  have  in  its 
hands  the  power  of  the  purse  —  the  citadel  of  its 
strength,  if  the  supplies  were  only  voted  for  three 
months.  But  when  the  party  was  consulted  upon  this 
suggestion,  it  was  found  that  there  were  several  who 
feared  that  any  limitation  of  the  ordinary  vote  in  sup- 
ply would  affect  public  credit  and  alarm  the  country. 
I  therefore  reluctantl}^  renounced  this  intention. 

As  leader  of  the  Liberal  party  in  the  House  of  Com- 
mons, I  had  no  smooth  path  before  me.  To  turn  the 
majority  into  a  minority  by  a  direct  vote  of  want  of 
confidence  would  have  been  easy.  But  my  object  was 
to  keep  the  majority  together ;  and  in  the  whole  twenty 
years  during  which  I  led  the  Liberal  party  in  the  House 
of  Commons,  I  never  had  so  difficult  a  task.  The 
plain  and  obvious  plan  of  voting  the  supplies  for  three 
months  being  given  up,  the  question  naturally  occurred, 
in  what  manner  could  Sir  Robert  Peel  obtain  that  fair 
trial  which  his  own  partisans  and  many  independent 
Whigs  called  for  on  his  behalf?  There  appeared  no 
question  so  well  fitted  for  an  experimentum  cntcis  as 
the  question  of  the  Irish  Church.  The  proposal  for  a 
commission,  made  by  Lord  Grey*s  Government,  had 
been  considered  by  four  of  the  leading  membei*s  of  the 
Cabinet  as  a  test  of  principle  ;  and  the  Liberal  members 
of  the  first  reformed  House  of  Commons  had  accepted 
the  question  of  the  integrity  and  perpetual  endowment 
of  the  Irish  Church,  as  marking  the  frontier  line  be- 
tween  Liberal  and  Tory  principles.     I  therefore  pro- 


KESOLUTION  ON  IRISH  CHURCH.  HI 

posed  to  bring  forward  a  resolution,  wliich,  on  tlie  one 
hand,  would  be  supported  by  Lord  Ho  wick,  and  was,  on 
the  other,  the  basis  of  an  alliance  with  O'Connell  and 
the  Irish  members.  Compact  there  was  none ;  but  an 
alUance  on  honorable  terms  of  mutual  co-operation 
undoubtedly  existed.  The  Whigs  remained  as  before, 
the  firm  defenders  of  the  Union;  O'Connell  remained 
as  before,  the  ardent  advocate  of  repeal ;  but  upon 
intermediate  measures,  on  which  the  two  parties  could 
agree  consistently  with  their  principles,  there  was  no 
want  of  cordiality.  Nor  did  I  ever  see  cause  to  com- 
plain of  O'Connell's  conduct.  He  confined  his  opposi- 
tion fairly  to  Irish  measures.  He  never  countenanced 
the  Canadian  Catholics  in  their  disaffection,  nor  pro- 
moted a  recurrence  to  physical  force,  nor  used  trades- 
unions  as  a  means  of  discord  and  separation  among 
classes. 

I  may  pass  over  the  interval  between  the  first  pro- 
posal of  interference  with  the  revenues  of  the  Irish 
Church  and  Sir  Robert  Peel's  surrender  of  power. 
Those  proceedings  are  amply  detailed  in  the  '  Parlia- 
mentary Debates.' 

On  Lord  Melbourne's  return  to  power,  a  question  of 
great  interest  arose.  He  had  determined,  some  months 
before  the  dissolution  of  Sir  Robert  Peel's  Ministry,  that 
he  would  not  again  sit  in  the  same  Cabinet  with  Lord 
Brougham.  What  were  the  reasons  for  this  determina- 
tion ?  In  order  to  form  even  a  conjecture,  it  is  neces- 
sary to  give  a  sketch,  however  slight,  of  the  character 
of  Lord  Brougham. 

Lord  Brougham  was  a  man  of  extraordinary  powers 
of  mind.  It  must  be  said  also  that,  with  many  aber- 
rations, those  powers  of  mind  were  generally  directed 
to  great  and  worthy  objects,  —  to  the  abolition  of  the 


112  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

Slave  Trade  and  of  slavery,  to  the  improvement  of  law, 
to  the  promotion  of  education,  to  the  furtherance 
of  civil  and  religious  liberty.  His  speech  on  the 
trial  and  condemnation  of  missionary  Smith  combined 
the  closest  and  most  pressing  logic  with  the  most  elo- 
quent denunciations  of  oppression  and  the  most  power- 
ful appeal  to  justice.  It  contributed,  no  doubt,  in  a 
very  marked  degree,  to  the  extinction  of  slavery 
throughout  the  dominions  of  the  Crown  of  England. 
His  speech  of  six  hours  on  the  amendment  of  the  law 
was  large  and  comprehensive  in  its  general  view,  search- 
ing and  elaborate  in  its  details.  The  institution  of  the 
Judicial  Committee  of  Privy  Council  was  a  most  valua- 
ble result  of  his  exertions  as  a  law  reformer.  His 
labors  regarding  the  endowed  schools  and  misapplied 
charities  of  England  destroyed  many  flagrant  abuses, 
detected  the  perversion  of  a  large  amount  of  charitable 
funds,  and  led  the  way  to  those  further  inquiries,  and 
those  remedial  measures,  of  which  we  have  seen  the 
commencement  and  progress,  but  of  which  the  con- 
summation is  yet  to  come.  It  would  be  taking  a 
narrow  view  to  complain  that  large  sums  have  been 
spent  upon  inquiries,  and  we  have  not  as  yet  had  an  ' 
adequate  return.  Lord  Brougham's  speeches  at  the  bar 
of  the  House  of  Lords,  on  the  Bill  of  Pains  and  Penal- 
ties against  Queen  Caroline,  were  striking  specimens  of 
a  powerful  understanding;  and  his  great  speech  in 
opening  the  defence  was  the  most  wonderful  effort  of 
oratory  I  ever  heard.  Nor  can  any  one  who  heard  him 
remember  with  any  other  feelings  than  those  of  the 
highest  admiration  his  speech  on  the  second  reading  of  ' 
the  Reform  Bill  in  the  House  of  Lords.  The  speech 
which  he  made  at  the  assizes,  in  defence  of  Ambi-ose 
Williams,  in  1821,  carries  satire  and  sarcasm  to  a  height 


LORD  BROUGHAM.  113 

that  may  be  called  sublime.  But  his  speech  on  the 
conduct  of  the  continental  powers  of.  Europe  towards 
Spain  —  a  country  which  had  been  guilty  of  the  offence 
of  endeavoring  to  dispose  of  its  own  destiny,  and  to 
establish  a  free  government  —  was  certainly  one  of  his 
brightest  flights.  His  allusion  to  the  protest  of  the 
Russian  Minister  at  Madrid,  who  had  declared,  with 
horror,  that  blood  had  been  shed  in  the  Royal  Palace, 
was  at  once  a  withering  invective  and  a  just  condemna- 
tion of  despotism.  '  If  I  had  been  one  of  the  counsel- 
lors of  the  Emperor  of  Russia,'  he  said,  'the  last 
subject  I  would  have  advised  my  master  to  touch  upon 
would  have  been  that  of  "  bloodshed  in  the  Royal 
Palace."  '  The  reigning  Emperor  of  Russia  was  Alex- 
ander I.  At  the  epoch  of  his  coronation,  a  lady,  writ- 
ing from  St.  Petersburg,  had  described  the  ceremony  ii? 
these  terms :  '  The  Emperor  entered  the  church  pre- 
ceded by  the  assassins  of  his  grandfather,  surrounded 
by  the  assassins  of  his  father,  and  followed  by  his  own.' 

The  question  recurs,  if  such  were  the  qualities  and 
such  the  achievements  of  Lord  Brougham,  why  was 
the  Great  Seal  not  restored  to  him  ?  After  one  of  his 
most  striking  speeches  against  Lord  Melbourne,  Lord 
Melbourne  replied  in  these  terms :  '  My  Lords,  you  have 
heard  the  eloquent  speech  of  the  noble  and  learned 
Lord  —  one  of  the  most  eloquent  he  ever  delivered  in 
this  House  —  and  I  leave  your  Lordships  to  consider 
what  must  he  the  nature  and  strength  of  the  objections 
which  prevent  any  Government  from  availing  them- 
selves of  the  services  of  such  a  man.' 

What,  then,  was  the  nature  of  the  objections  which 
prevented  Lord  Melbourne  from  offering  to  return  the 
Great  Seal  into  the  hands  of  Lord  Brougham  when  he 
himself  resumed  o£Qce  ?     These  objections  came  first 

8 


114  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

from  Lord  Melbourne,  and  were  frankly  communicated 
by  him  to  Lord  Brougham,  before  he  finally  decided  to 
form  an  Administration.  In  the  next  place,  these  objec- 
tions could  not  fairly  be  said  to  imply  any  charge  of 
treachery  towards  his  chief,  or  his  colleagues,  during 
the  former  Administration.  He  had  not  written  to 
Lord  Wellesley  with  a  purpose  to  undermine  Lord 
Grey;  he  had  willingly  assented  to  the  selection  of 
LorcV  Melbourne  as  Prime  Minister.  He  had  not 
attempted  to  carry  measures  to  which  the  Prime  Minis- 
ter was  opposed,  nor,  like  Lord  Thurlow  and  Lord 
Loughborough,  to  thwart  measures  which  the  Prime 
Minister  had  approved.  His  faults  were,  a  recklessness 
of  judgment,  which  hurried  him  beyond  all  the  bounds 
of  prudence,  an  omnivorous  appetite  for  praise,  a  per- 
petual interference  in  matters  with  which  he  had  no 
direct  concern,  and,  above  all,  a  disregard  of  truth. 
This  spirit  of  interference  led  him  to  promise  his  sup- 
port to  Mr.  Canning,  without  any  communication  with 
Lord  Althorp,  and  with  great  indiscretion  to  influence 
Lord  Wellesley  on  the  renewal  of  the  Coercion  Act 
without  any  communication  with  Lord  Grey.  I  remem- 
ber Lord  Dudley  saying  to  me,  many  years  before  this 
time,  '  What  a  character  Brougham  would  have  been 
for  the  pen  of  Lord  Clarendon !  *'  Lord  Appleby  (sup- 
posing he  had  got  his  peerage)  was  a  man  who,  if  the 
solidity  of  his  judgment  had  been  equal  to  the  preg- 
nancy of  his  wit,  would  not  have  been  surpassed  in 
this  or  any  other  time."  '  This  was  the  truth.  Lord 
Brougham^s  vast  powers  of  mind  were  neutralized  by  a 
want  of  judgment,  which  prevented  any  party  from 
placing  entire  confidence  in  him,  and  by  a  frequent 
forgetfulness  of  what  he  himself  had  done  or  said  but  a 
short  time  before. 


LORD  MELBOURNE.  115 

Lord  Melbourne  was  a  man  of  a  very  different  char- 
acter. His  ease  of  manner  and  apparent  indifference 
tended  to  conceal  the  excellence  of  his  understanding 
and  the  warmth  of  his  feelings.  He  would  have  been 
ready,  perhaps  too  ready,  from  the  easiness  of  his  tem- 
per, to  yield  to  the  incessant  urgency  of  Brougham's 
interference.  But  his  understanding  would  have  con- 
demned the  concessions  he  made,  and  his  feelings  of 
pride  and  shame  would  have  made  him  deeply  sensible 
to  the  reproach  that,  while  nominally  Prime  Minister, 
he  was  adopting  decisions  which  he  could  not  approve, 
and  was  degraded  by  the  very  elevation  upon  which  he 
apparently  stood.  It  was  for  these  reasons,  I  conceive, 
that,  many  weeks  before  the  change  of  Government,  he 
resolved  not  to  offer  the  Great  Seal  to  Lord  Brougham. 
He  told  me  of  his  fixed  resolution  on  this  head  many 
weeks  before  the  dissolution  of  Sir  Robert  Peel's  Min- 
istry. When  his  resolution  became  known.  Lord  Mel- 
bourne exposed  himself  and  his  party  to  the  charge  of 
ingratitude  to  a  man  whose  vast  powers  and  splendid 
services  made  him  an  object  of  general  admiration.' 
Observing  as  I  did  the  characters  of  the  two  men,  I 
thought  Lord  Melbourne  justified  in  his  decision,  and 
I  willingly  stood  by  him  in  his  difficulties.  Nor  did 
Lord  Brougham  ever  act  towards  me  with  less  cordi- 
ality on  account  of  the  part  I  took.  Indeed,  I  should 
have  been  glad  to  see  Brougham  in  the  Cabinet,  and  it 
could  not  be  denied  that  a  Liberal  Ministry,  deprived 
of  the  assistance  of  Lord  Grey,  Lord  A] thorp,  and 
Lord  Brougham,  opposed  by  the  Duke  of  Wellington, 
Lord  Lyndhurst,  Lord  Aberdeen,  Sir  Robert  Peel,  Lord 
Stanley,  and  Sir  James  Graham,  and  resting  its  claims 
to  support  on  the  justice  of  its  Irish  poUcy,  of  which 
the  merits  were  Kttle  understood,  stood  daily  in  great 


116  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

risk  of  overthrow.  Yet,  from  April,  1835,  to  August, 
1841,  the  Ministry  stood  its  ground,  and  was  able  to 
pass  measures  of  great  importance  to  the  public  wel- 
fare. But  these  measures  encountered  much  opposi- 
tion, and  the  task  was  one  of  constant  labor  and 
anxiety.  To  add  to  the  public  discontent  and  impa- 
tience. Lord  Lyndhurst  contrived  to  induce  the  peers  to 
throw  out  measures  which  were  of  undoubted  public 
utility,  but  had  no  strong  breeze  of  popular  approbation 
in  their  favor.  Among  the  measures  which  owed  their 
success  to  the  restoration  of  a  Liberal  Administration,  I 
may  mention  three. 

First,  the  commutation  of  tithes.  The  unsettled 
state  of  this  question  was  deeply  injurious  to  the  in- 
terests of  agriculture,  and  to  those  of  the  Church.  In 
many  instances,  where  waste  lands  might  have  been 
brought  into  cultivation,  or  the  produce  of  cultivated 
lands  and  the  supply  of  food  to  the  people  largely  aug- 
mented, the  right  of  the  Church  to  appropriate  a  tenth 
of  the  produce,  without  regard  to  the  expense  of  the 
improvement,  was  a  positive  bar  to  cultivation.  In 
many  other  instances,  the  attempts  of  the  farmer  to 
abate  the  rights  of  the  Church,  and  to  force  the  clergy- 
man to  be  content  with  a  twentieth  part  of  the  produce, 
or  even  less,  instead  of  his  legal  tenth,  had  been  the 
source  of  wrangling  and  ill-will  between  the  farmers 
and  the  clergymen,  to  the  destruction  of  Christian 
charity,  and  of  the  harmony  that  ought  to  prevail  be- 
tween the  pastor  and  his  flock.  Pitt  had  attempted  in 
vain  to  frame  a  complete  measure  on  this  subject.  Peel 
had  endeavored  to  remedy  the  notorious  evils  by  a 
voluntary  commutation ;  but  a  commutation  short  of 
compulsory  would  have  left  many  of  the  worst  cases 
untouched  —  cases  in  which  the  Church  had  insisted  un- 


TITHES,   REGISTRATION  OF   BIRTHS.  HT 

wisely  upon  its  full  rights,  or  a  combination  of  farmers 
had  determined  to  vex  and  worry  a  clergyman  of  easy 
disposition,  till  they  reduced  him  to  penury  by  their 
obstinacy  and  injustice.  All  the  evils  of  the  tithe  sys- 
tem were  the  subject  of  fair  compromise  and  permanent 
settlement  by  the  Act  of  1836.  Three  commissioners, 
two  of  whom  were  appointed  by  the  Crown  and  one  by 
the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  were  empowered,  after 
examination,  to  proceed  by  certain  fixed  rules  to  a  final 
adjudication.  In  about  seven  years  this  process  was 
completed,  and  a  work  from  which  Pitt  had  shrunk  was 
accomplished.  The  progress  of  agriculture  was  freed 
from  vexatious  impediments,  and  the  clergy  were  spared 
the  unseemly  contentions  which  had  fostered  ill-will 
and  disturbed  social  relations. 

Other  questions  affected  religious  liberty.  The  Church 
had  taken  possession  of  the  registers  of  baptism,  by 
which  alone  the  number  of  births  was  ascertained. 
Marriage  was  legally  a  religious  ceremony,  and  although 
by  the  ancient  laws  it  was  a  civil  contract,  those  who 
did  not  belong  to  the  Church  could  neither  be  married 
in  their  own  places  of  worship,  nor  in  any  building  of 
a  civil  character,  nor  by  any  other  form  than  that  of 
the  Establishment.  So,  likewise,  the  performance  of  the 
Burial  Service  was  confined  to  those  who  had  been 
baptized  according  to  the  Anglican  rite,  and  there  ex- 
isted no  civil  reo^istration  of  deaths.  These  matters 
were  made  the  subject  of  legislation.  An  Act  was 
introduced  providing  for  the  marriage  of  Protestant 
Dissenters,  Roman  Catholics,  and  Jews,  according  to 
their  own  rites,  and  enacting  a  civil  marriage  in  the 
office  of  a  registrar  for  those  who  were  contented  with 
a  civil  contract  only. 

The  question  of  civil  marriages  raised  much  objec- 


118  RECOLLECTIONS  AND   SUGGESTIONS. 

tion,  on  the  part  of  Sir  Robert  Inglis  in  the  House  of 
Commons,  and  of  the  Bishop  of  Exeter  in  the  House  of 
Lords  ;  and  although  the  Tory,  party  did  not  generally 
join  in  the  opposition,  the  principle  Ls  so  important  that 
I  may  be  excused  for  dilating  upon  it. 

Generally  speaking,  Scripture  is  unfairly  or  unwisely 
quoted  in  political  controversy ;  but  there  are  some 
words  of  Christ's  uttered  on  a  memorable  occasion,  which 
it  is  impossible  for  politicians  to  keep  out  of  view,  in 
the  course  of  discussions  on  government  and  legislation. 
Those  words  are,  '  Render  unto  Caesar  the  things  which 
are  Caesar's,  and  unto  God  the  things  that  ar^  God's.'  ^ 
The  immediate  question  was  the  payment  of  tribute : 
but  the  precept  is  general,  and  statesmen  must  ask 
themselves  what  things  are  Caesar's  and  what  things 
are  God's,  or,  in  other  words,  what  are  the  limits  of 
the  temporal  and  spiritual  power. 

The  spirit  of  priestcraft,  or,  as  the  present  age,  fond 
of  long  words,  calls  it,  the  spirit  of  sacerdotalism,  has 
been  continually  engaged  in  extending  the  spiritual, 
and  restricting  the  temporal,  power.  Time  was  when 
in  England  a  priest  who  had  committed  murder  was 
withheld  from  the  civil,  and  claimed  by  a  spiritual  tri- 
bunal. In  the  same  spirit,  the  birth  of  a  child  was  not 
acknowledged  or  recorded  by  the  State  until  it  had 
undergone  the  rite  of  baptism  as  ordained  by  one  sect 
of  Christianity. 

Other  distinctions  have  been  made,  and  other  usurpa- 
tions attempted.  Some  of  these  have  been  repelled, 
others  quietly  withdrawn.  But  there  are  two  points 
upon  which  disputes  still  exist,  and  with  regard  to 


1  St.  Matthew,  xxU.  1& 


LEGALITY  OF  MARRIAGE.  119 

which  what  is  called  by  diplomatists  a  rectification  of 
frontiers,  appears  to  be  urgently  required. 

One  is  marriage,  the  other  education. 

The  question  of  marriage  is  one  that  obviously  con- 
cerns civil  interests  of  the  highest  importance.  The 
succession  to  property,  to  political  rights  of  subjects 
and  citizens,  nay,  the  very  succession  to  the  throne,  is 
decided,  if  we  attend  to  the  priesthood,  according  to 
the  law  of  marriage  which  prevails  in  the  Church.  If 
we  listen  to  some  of  the  highest  Roman  Catholic  authori- 
ties, the  divorce  of  Napoleon  I.  was  null  and  void,  and 
the  prince  whom  the  French  call  Napoleon  II.  must 
have  been  an  illegitimate  son.^  According  to  the  same, 
or  still  higher  Roman  Catholic  authorities,  the  marriage 
of  George,  Prince  of  Wales,  to  Mrs.  Fitzherbert  was 
valid,  and  if  that  lady  had  had  a  son,  he  must  have 
been  considered  by  Roman  Catholics  as  the  true  heir  of 
the  Crown  of  England.^ 

Thus  far  and  thus  high  reaches  the  question  whether 
the  State  or  the  Church  is  supreme  in  regard  to  the 
validity  of  marriage.  Property  in  all  its  forms,  legiti- 
macy of  birth  in  every  class  of  society,  depends  on  the 
decision. 

The  Marriage  Bill  of  1836,  in  contradiction  to  these 
sacerdotal  authorities,  considered  marriage  as  a  matter 
within  the  competence  of  the  State,  and  not  as  part  of 
the  jurisdiction  of  the  Church. 

Sir  Robert  Inglis,  a  firm  supporter  of  Church  preten- 
sions, said  in  the  committee  on  the  bill,  '  With  the 
single   exception   of  the  time  of  the  Great  Rebellion, 


1  See  *  Memoir8  of  Cardinal  Gonsalvi.' 

2  See  tlie  statements  of  Mr.  Langdale  in  '  Memoirs  of  Mrs.  Fitzher- 
bert.'   8vo.    1866. 


120  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

there  was  no  one  instance  in  the  history  of  the  country 
of  marriage  having  been  considered  otherwise  than  as 
a  religious  ceremony.  This  was  a  solitary  attempt  to 
give  a  civil  character  to  a  religious  contract.' 

In  reply  to  this  speech,  I  said,  '  That  the  great  object 
of  the  bill  was  to  allow  every  person  to  be  married 
according  to  whatever  form  his  conscience  dictated. 
Here  were,  first,  members  of  the  Church  of  England, 
next  the  Dissenters,  who  considered  maiTiage  a  relig- 
ious ceremony,  and  preferred  being  married  in  their 
own  chapels ;  the  first  were  left  in  their  present  situa- 
tion, the  second  were  permitted  to  carry  their  wishes 
into  effect.  There  were  other  classes  of  Dissenters  who 
considered  marriage  not  a  religious  but  a  civil  cere- 
mony. Taking  the  broad  principle  of  religious  liberty, 
I  felt  that  we  were  bound  to  provide  for  all  these 
classes ;  I  did  not  think  that  the  House  had  a  right  to 
tell  one  class  of  men  that  their  scruples  were  just  and 
reasonable,  and  to  reject  all  regard  for  those  of  others. 
If  the  bill  were  carried  with  that  clause,  I  entertained 
no  doubt  but  that  ninety-nine  marriages  out  of  one 
hundred  would  still  be  considered  as  religious  ceremo- 
nies. Although  the  number  of  marriages  celebrated 
upon  any  other  principle  might  be  few,  the  principle 
was  a  great  one,  and  we  were  bound  to  maintain  it.' 

In  the  House  of  Lords,  the  Bishop  of  Exeter  spoke 
on  behalf  of  the  Church,  and  thus  shortly  summed  up 
his  objections :  '  This  bill,  in  his  opinion,  went  the 
length  of  inviting  the  members  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land to  contract  marriage  without  any  religious  cere- 
mony, and  that  was  a  principle  ho  hoped  the  legislature 
never  would  adopt.  By  this  bill  parties  would  be  able 
to  contract  marriage  without  uttering  a  syllable  as  to 
the  nature  of  the  contract,  beyond  that  they  desired  to 


MARRIAGE  BILL.  121 

live  together  as  man  and  wife.  They  would  not  even 
be  obliged  to  say  that  it  was  a  contract  for  life,  not- 
withstanding it  was  a  contract  of  the  most  solemn  and 
binding  description.  The  only  period  in  the  history 
of  this  country  at  which  a  similar  attempt  was  made 
was  during  the  time  of  the  usurpation ;  but,  although 
marriage  might  then  be  contracted  before  a  magistrate, 
a  strictly  solemn  and  religious  formula  was  enjoined. 
Here,  however,  the  contract  was  to  be  purely  civil,  and 
attended  with  no  greater  solemnities  than  would  be 
required  for  a  contract  entered  into  between  parties 
for  mere  service.  He  must  insist  that  a  contract  so 
sacred  and  indissoluble  should  be  accompanied  with 
suitable  solemnities,  and,  unless  this  were  done,  no 
earthly  inducement  could  prevail  with  him  to  allow 
the  measure  to  progress  another  stage  without  oppos- 
ing it.' 

Although  much  was  done  by  the  Act  of  1836, 1  stated, 
when  the  bill  was  returned  to  the  Commons,  that  I 
accepted  the  amendments  of  the  Lords,  on  account  of 
the  great  principle  they  admitted,  but  not  as  a  final 
settlement  of  the  question. ^  '  In  France  and  Italy,  by 
the  prevailing  laws  of  these  countries,  the  civil  marriage 
is  alone  recognized,  and  alone  gives  the  right  of  succes- 
sion. In  the  United  Kingdom  various  laws  prevail. 
The  pretensions  of  the  clergy  were  got  rid  of  by  the 
Act  of  1836,  so  far  as  England  is  concerned.  But  in 
Scotland  and  Ireland  the  law  is  still  very  uncertain,  and 
Sir  Roundell  Palmer  has  wisely  proposed,  in  a  very 
clear  and  able  speech,  that  there  shall  be  one  uniform 
law  for  the  United  Kingdom.  It  will  be  matter  for 
consideration  whether  the  future  law,  instead  of  recog- 

1  Hansard's  '  Debates/  vol.  xxxv.  p.  1305. 


122  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

niziiig  the  marriage  registers  of  every  Chiistian  com-, 
munion,  and  every  Jewish  synagogue,  should  not  be 
founded  on  the  same  principle  as  the  law  of  France  and 
Italy,  constituting  civil  marriage  the  only  bond  recog- 
nized by  the  State,  and  leaving  to  the  parties  concerned 
to  add  any  religious  ceremony  or  ceremonies  they  may 
think  proper. 

Upon  this  subject  I  should  have  liked  to  listen  to  the 
opinions  of  the  Lord  Chancellor  of  Ireland,  and  the  Lord 
Justice-General  of  Scotland ;  but  as  Lord  Malraesbury 
will  not  admit  life  peers  into  the  House  of  Lords,  I 
fear  we  have  no  chance  of  hearing  the  voices  of  those 
eminent  and  learned  persons  in  that  assembly. 

Still  I  hope,  although  we  have  no  promise  from  the 
Government  to  that  effect,  that  a  bill  on  marriage  will 
be  introduced  by  them  during  the  next  session.  I  trust, 
above  all,  that  Sir  Roundell  Palmer  will  not  lose  sight  of 
this  great  matter,  so  worthy  of  his  large  capacity  and 
undoubted  zeal  for  the  public  welfare. 

On  the  subject  of  Education,  the  Church  of  England 
has  not  been  slow  to  follow  the  traces  of  the  Church  of 
Rome  by  an  attempt  to  monopolize  the  question; 

In  1807,  the  British  and  Foreign  School  Society  com- 
menced its  work,  with  the  flag  of  '  Schools  for  all  I ' 
The  Established  Church  pronounced  at  first  the  opinion 
that  the  children  of  the  poor  should  not  go  to  school  at 
all ;  but,  finding  that  George  III.  had  expressed  a  wish 
that  every  child  in  his  dominions  should  be  able  to  read 
the  Bible ;  that  the  Duke  of  Kent,  the  Duke  of  Bed- 
ford, and  others  were  promoters  of  the  British  schools, 
and  that  national  opinion  was  favorable  to  education, 
changed  its  ground,  and  in  1809  set  up  the  so-called 
National  Society  on  a  narrow  and  exclusive  principle. 

In  1832,  Lord  Brougham  induced  the  Government  to 


EDUCATION.  123 

-propose  a  vote  of  10,000Z.  each  to  the  National  and 
British  and  Foreign  School  Societies. 

In  1839,  with  her  Majesty's  sanction,  I  wrote  a  letter 
to  Lord  Lansdowne,  President  of  the  Council,  proposing 
a  scheme  of  National  Education.  The  principles  I  laid 
down  were,  that  '  the  youth  of  the  kingdom  should  be 
religiously  brought  up,'  and  that  '  the  rights  of  con- 
science should  be  respected.' 

These  last  words  raised  a  storm.  Mr.  Stanley  quoted, 
in  a  great  speech,  a  dictum  of  Henry  IV.,  only  four 
centuries  old,  assuming  for  the  Church  the  monopoly  of 
education.  The  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  carried,  in 
the  House  of  Lords,  an  address  adverse  to  our  unhal- 
lowed scheme.  The  grant  proposed  was  only  carried  in 
the  House  of  Commons  by  a  majority  of  two. 

In  these  circumstances.  Lord  Lansdowne  and  I  met 
the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  (Dr.  Howley),  the 
Bishop  of  London  (Dr.  Blomfield),  and  the  Bishop  of 
Salisbury  (Dr.  Denison),  and  agreed  to  a  compromise. 

Inspection,  which  Lord  Lansdowne  especially  insisted 
upon,  was  to  be  conducted  in  the  schools  of  the  National 
Society  by  inspectors,  in  the  appointment  of  whom  the 
bishops  were  to  concur,  and  whose  reports,  comprising 
religious  as  well  as  secular  instruction,  were  to  be  com- 
municated to  the  bishop  of  the  diocese,  as  well  as  to  the 
Committee  of  the  Privy  Council.  Tuition  in  British 
schools,  and  in  Protestant  Dissenting  and  Roman  Cath- 
olic schools,  was  likewise  to  be  subjected  to  inspection, 
but  only  so  far  as  regarded  secular  teaching. 

This  arrangement,  in  which,  with  Lord  Lansdowne, 
I  was  glad  to  concur,  has  no  doubt  done  much  to  pro- 
mote education,  and  to  dispel  the  darkness  of  ignorance  ; 
but,  as  a  plan  of  National  Education,  it  left  much  to  be 
desired. 


124  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

In  the  first  place,  it  was  evident  that  where  education 
was  most  wanted,  least  would  be  given.  Where  the 
land-owners  were  rich  and  public-spirited,  where  the 
clergy  were  zealous,  and  the  farmers  generous,  schools 
would  flourish.  But  where  land-owners  and  farmei-s 
would  give  no  encouragement,  schools  would  be  alto- 
gether wanting,  or  miserably  conducted. 

Then,  again,  where  Dissenters  existed,  but  were  not 
numerous  enough  to  keep  a  school  of  their  own,  the 
clergy  would  exclude  the  Baptist,  the  Independent,  and 
the  Unitarian.  The  British  schools,  where  Christianity 
is  taught  pure  and  simple,  are  sure  to  be  distasteful  to 
the  Church  of  England,  to  the  Church  of  Rome,  and  to 
sectarian  zealots  of  all  denominations. 

It  was  not  easy  to  supply  these  deficiencies  ;  and 
indeed  I  never  considered  the  plan  otherwise  than  as  a 
step  in  the  education  of  the  people,  till  the  tide  of 
public  opinion  should  set  more  strongly  in  favor  of 
National  Education. 

The  Duke  of  Newcastle's  commission  has  done  much 
to  open  the  way  to  a  National  plan.  Their  scheme,  if 
adopted  on  the  basis  that  every  county  should  be  divided 
into  separate  districts,  that  every  district  should  be  bound 
to  furnish  an  adequate  number  of  schools,  on  a  scale  to 
be  fixed  by  Parliament ;  that  if  supported  by  rates,  the 
ratepayers  should  decide  on  the  religious  instruction  to 
be  given,  or,  if  they  preferred  it,  give  a  secular  character 
to  the  school ;  and,  lastly,  that  when  any  religious 
instruction  is  given,  it  should  be  either  in  the  first  or 
the  last  hour  of  school  attendance,  and  that  during  the 
hour  of  religious  instruction  every  parent  should  be  at 
liberty  to  withdraw  his  children,  by  a  strictly  defined 
conscience  clause,  —  might  form  the  outline  of  a  plan  of 
National  Education. 


With  a  compulsory  provision  for  the  building  of 
schools,  I  should  not  be  disposed  to  insist  on  the  com- 
pulsory attendance  of  children.  It  will  probably  be 
expedient  to  impose  a  fine  upon  employers  who  have 
in  their  service  boys  or  girls  between  twelve  and  eigh- 
teen years  of  age,  who  cannot  read  and  write ;  but  this 
power  must  be  used  with  great  moderation.  English 
farmers  are  gradually  becoming  enlightened,  but  have 
still  a  long  way  to  go  before  they  are  on  a  level  with 
the  farmers  of  Scotland,  or  the  artisans  of  our  great 
towns. 

It  is,  in  fact,  from  the  great  towns  that  light  must 
proceed.  From  them  was  spread  the  knowledge  -of 
Christianity,  from  them  proceeded  the  revival  of  letters, 
from  them  have  come  reform  of  Parliament  and  free 
trade. 

I  have  elsewhere  given  the  reasons  which  induced 
the  Government  to  abandon,  in  1838,  what  was  called 
the  appropriation  clause.  The  public  mind  of  Ireland, 
guided  by  O'Connell,  wished  to  go  much  farther ;  the 
public  mind  of  England  and  Scotland,  having  neither 
knowledge  of  Ireland  nor  sympath}^  with  its  inhabitants, 
was  not  prepared  to  go  so  far.  But,  in  giving  up  the 
appropriation  clause,  the  Government  not  only  main- 
tained a  just  administration  in  Ireland,  for  which  Burke 
had  written  in  vain,  but  had  passed  through  Parliament 
a  settlement  of  the  Irish  tithes,  for  which  Grattan  had 
so  long  and  so  fruitlessly  labored. 

I  may  take  this  opportunity  of  considering  the  state 
in  which  Ireland  was  left  by  the  Government,  when  the 
appropriation  clause  was  abandoned.  I  need  say  nothing 
here  of  the  administration  ;  that  subject  is  treated  in  the 
speech  of  1839,  when  I  proposed  a  vote  of  confidence  in 
the  Administration,  so  far  as  Ireland  was  concerned. 


126  RECOLLECTIONS  AND   SUGGESTIONS. 

The  law  abolishing  tithes  and  substituting  a  rent- 
charge  met  with  so  general  a  concurrence  from  all 
parties  in  Parliament,  that,  as  usually  happens  in  such 
cases,  its  importance  was  very  much  overlooked.  It 
is  extraordinary  that  Mr.  Bright,  who  has  spoken  with 
so  much  force  and  eloquence  on  the  Irish  Church,  and 
who  has  devoted  so  much  study  to  Irish  affairs,  has  not 
even  enumerated,  among  the  measures  of  importance  to 
the  welfare  of  Ireland,  which  have  been  passed  duiing 
the  last  fifty  years,  the  Act  of  1838.  Yet  if  he  will  look 
to  Grattan's  speeches  made  before  the  Union,  and  to  the 
speeches  made  in  1832-33,  on  the  subject  of  tithes,  he 
will  see  how  deeply  the  people  of  Ireland  were  tormented, 
and  the  whole  course  of  peaceable  government  disturbed, 
by  the  collection  of  tithe  in  kind.^  Any  one  who  will 
read  this  part  of  the  history  of  Ireland  will  see  that  a 
measure  which  changed  the  collection  of  tithes  from  a 
question  between  tithe-proctor  and  peasant,  into  a  ques- 
tion between  landlord  and  tenant,  with  a  percentage  of 
twenty-five  per  cent  to  the  landlord  for  tlie  cost  and 
trouble  of  collection,  and  thereby  put  an  end  to  all  the 
oppression,  all  the  ill-will,  and  all  the  bloodshed  of  for- 
mer contests,  was  one  of  immense  value  to  the  whole 
body  of  small  occupiers  in  Ireland.  No  measure  has 
tended  more  to  the  peaceful  progress  of  Ireland  than  the 
Tithe  Act  of  1838. 

The  legislation  of  that  year,  taken  together  with  the 
Catholic  Relief  Act  of  1829,  the  abolition  of  the  Church 
cess  by  the  Church  Temporalities  Act,  and  the  Poor- 


1  See  especially  Mr.  Grattan's  *  Speeches,'  vol.  ii.  MarchMS,  1787 ;  Feb- 
ruary 14,  1788;  April  14,  1788;  May  8,  1789.  Sec  also  tbe  debates  on 
the  outrages  that  took  place,  and  on  the  blood  tliat  was  abed  in  Ireland 
on  the  subject  of  tithes  from  1832  to  1885. 


IRELAND.  127 

law  of  1838,  left,  however,  three  subjects  of  immense 
importance  for  future  consideration. 

The  first  of  these  was  the  Established  Church  of 
Ireland.  Every  author  who  has  written  on  the  subject 
of  Church  Establishments  has  taken  for  granted  that 
where  a  Church  has  to  be  established  by  the  State,  it 
should  be  the  Church  of  the  people,  and  the  Irish  Estab- 
lished Church  never  was,  never  had  been,  and  never 
could  be,  the  Church  of  the  people. 

It  has  been  said,  blinking  the  question  in  dispute, 
that  the  clergy  of  the  Established  Church  of  Ireland 
taught  religious  truth,  that  they  were  a  respectable 
body  of  men,  that  they  were  well  educated,  and  that 
they  were  kind  and  charitable  to  their  neighbors, 
whether  Catholic  or  Protestant. 

These  arguments  put  me  in  mind  of  a  story  told  at 
some  length,  in  verse,  by  Dr.  Herbert,  afterwards  Dean 
of  Manchester.  He  relates  how  a  traveller,  hospitably 
received  by  a  friend,  in  course  of  conversation,  lays 
down  as  an  incontrovertible  maxim  that  that  which  is 
excellent  per  se  can  never  be  misplaced.  His  host  does 
not  dispute  the  maxim,  but  at  supper  places  upon  the 
table  a  plate  of  salted  cherries.  "  When  his  friend  makes 
a  wry  face  at  the  nauseous  mixture,  the  host  tells  him 
that  his  maxim  is  thus  refuted. 

So  it  was  with  the  Established  Church  in  Ireland. 
The  English  fruit  was  wholesome,  the  Irish  salt  was 
pungent,  but  the  fruit  and  the  salt  together  make  a 
most  unpalatable  dessert. 

Happily  this  whole  mischief  has  been  abated  by  the 
Act  of  1869.  Although  many  supplementary  provisions 
may  be  required,  the  main  principle  of  that  Act  wiU 
remain  a  permanent  benefit  to  the  people  of  Ireland. 

The   Minister   who   brought  forward  and  carried  a 


128  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

bill  to  disestablish  and  disendow  the  Protestant  Church 
of  Ireland  had  to  put  forth  all  his  strength  in  bearing 
so  heavy  a  weight  upon  his  shoulders.  lie  had  to  unite 
in  one  phalanx  the  old  Liberal  party,  who  wished  to 
maintain  the  Church  of  England ;  the  Voluntaries,  who 
wished  to  abolish  all  Church  Establishments ;  the  nom- 
inees of  the  Irish  priests,  who  wished  to  compensate  the 
Church  of  Rome  in  Ireland  for  what  she  has  lost  in  Italy 
and  in  Spain  ;  and  the  representatives  of  the  stern  Pres- 
byterians of  Scotland,  who,  in  the  words  of  aij  anony- 
mous letter  which  I  received  from  Glasgow,  thought 
that  the  Church  of  Scotland  was  God's  truth,  and  the 
Church  of  Rome  was  the  devil's  lie. 

To  combine  these  parties,  so  as  to  gain  and  to  keep 
a  majority  of  one  hundred  and  twenty-six  in  favor  of  the 
measure,  and  at  the  same  time  not  to  depart  from  jus- 
tice, was  a  task  of  unparalleled  difficulty  ;  those  who 
have  long  been  convinced  of  the  iniquity  of  maintain- 
ing a  Church  Establishment  for  a  minority  must  be 
grateful  to  the  able  Minister  who  achieved  a  success 
so  speedy  and  so  complete. 

But  we  must  not  be  surprised  if  the  wants  of  Ireland 
have  been  in  a  great  degree  overlooked ;  if  tlie  hatred 
entertained  by  a  large  proportion  of  the  Low  Church, 
of  the  Protestant  Dissenters  of  England,  and  of  the 
Presbyterians  of  Scotland,  whether  endowed  or  seced- 
ing, against  the  Pope  and  the  Church  of  Rome,  should 
have  been  allowed  to  prevail  over  policy,  rather  than 
incur  any  risk  of  seeing  the  majority  divided  and  dis- 
banded. 

Moderate  men  ought  to  rejoice  that  the  words  of  the 
preamble,  upon  which  the  Liberation  Society  appeared 
at  one  time  disposed  to  insist,  have  been  expunged  at 
the  desire  of  a  majority  of  seventy-eight  in  the  House 


IRELAND.  129 

of  Lords,  and  that  the  disposition  of  the  surplus  in  all 
future  times,  instead  of  being  employed  in  the  degrada- 
tion of  the  Irish  people,  has  been  reserved  at  the  sug- 
gestion of  Lord  Cairns.  It  is  a  valuable  treasure  rescued 
from  the  wreck.  It  is  said  by  desponding  Protestants/ 
that  the  free  Protestant  Church  of  Ireland  cannot  flour- 
ish ;  that  the  Roman  Catholic  priest  has  in  his  armory 
weapons  more  potent  than  any  which  his  Protestant 
adversary  can  wield ;  that  by  absolution  he  can  relieve 
from  thousands  of  years  of  flames  and  torture  those 
among  the  departed  whom  his  penitent  most  loved  in 
life,  whom  he  fondly  cherishes  beyond  the  tomb. 

But  this  is  entirely  to  mistake  the  strength,  and  forego 
the  true  arms,  of  Protestantism. 

If,  indeed,  the  Protestant  clergy  rely  on  a  faint  copy 
of  the  doctrine  of  the  Roman  Catholic  real  presence, — 
if  they  rely  on  candles  and  incense,  fine  music  and 
gaudy  vestments,  then,  indeed,  their  Protestantism  is, 
what  Mr.  Shell  called  it.  Popery  with  a  bar  sinister. 
Such  an  imitation  can  never  compete  successfully  with 
the  legitimate  Roman  Church.  The  Queen  of  England 
might  as  well  order  her  army  to  fight  the  Chinese  with 
gingals  and  tomtoms,  or  President  Grant  send  his  troops 
against  the  Indians  armed  with  bows  and  arrows. 

The  strength  of  the  Reformation  lies  in  a  totally  dif- 
ferent direction.  Shakespeare  has  pointed  out  the  true 
source  of  Protestant  power :  — 

Sure  he  that  made  us  of  such  large  discourse, 
Looking  before  and  after,  gave  us  not 
Such  capability  and  god-like  reason 
To  fust  in  us  unused. 

It  is  because  men  feel  that  their  '  capability  and  god- 
like reason '  is  not  given  to  fust  in  them  *  unused,'  that 
they  endeavor  to  find  out  what  they  ought  to  think  and 

9 


130  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

to  believe  on  the  most  deeply  interesting  of  all  subjects. 
Hence  the  right  of  private  judgment,  hence  the  Bible 
of  Wicliffe,  and  the  Bible  of  Luther,  and  the  Bible  of 
Great  Britain.  Hence,  men  throw  aside  the  pseudo- 
popery  of  Oxford,  with  the  time- hallowed  popery  of 
Rome  ;  hence  they  reject  the  allurements  of  splendid 
churches,  gilded  vestments,  soft  music,  and  all  that  can 
entrance  the  senses  ;  hence  they  seek,  in  the  words  of 
Christ,  of  St.  Peter,  and  St.  Paul,  and  St.  John,  the  true 
spiritual  food  for  their  souls,  and  leave  below  them  the 
mists  of  theology  and  the  stars  of  earthly  splendor. 

It  is  in  such  a  spirit  that  the  Protestant  Church  of 
Ireland  must  act ;  it  is  with  such  weapons  that  she  will 
prevail. 

Archbishop  Murray  said,  '  Let  the  children  of  Ire- 
land read  the  Bible,  and  then  I  am  sure  they  will  be 
Catholics.'  Archbishop  Whately  said,  *  Let  the  chil- 
dren of  Ireland  read  the  Bible,  and  then  I  am  sure  they 
will  be  Protestants.'  I  admire  the  bold  and  confident 
spirit  in  which  these  two  prelates  proved  the  sincerity 
of  their  faith. 

The  Roman  Catholic  Chiirch  of  Ireland  has  unfor- 
tunately sadly  fallen  off  from  the  confidence  of  Arch- 
bishop Murray.  It  is  now  considered  dangerous  that  a 
Roman  Catholic  child  should  be  made  aware  that  there 
are  Protestant  children  in  the  land,  that  he  should  play 
with  them,  talk  with  them,  learn  arithmetic  with  them, 
be  on  friendly  terms  with  them,  or  consider  them  other- 
wise than  as  outcasts  from  heaven. 

A  better  prescription  for  sowing  hatred  and  ill-will 
between  Catholics  and  Protestants  in  Ireland  cannot 
well  bo  imagined.     Let  us  reflect  a  moment. 

Before  the  Church  of  Ireland  was  disestablished,  it 
was  usual,  natural,  and  even  right,  for  Liberals  to  look 


IRELAND.  131 

upon  the  claims  of  Roman  Catholics  with  some  degree 
of  partiality,  and  to  make  concessions,  both  as  to  men 
and  measures,  with  a  view  to  redress  the  balance  which 
Protestant  ascendency  so  greatly  disturbed. 

But  Liberal  Protestants  have  now  a  right  to  be 
strictly  just,  and  to  grant  to  the  Roman  Church  no  more 
than  that  Church  can  fairly  claim. 

The  two  principal  questions  which  remain  for  con- 
sideration are,  that  of  National  Education  and  that  of 
Land. 

In  considering  Irish  education,  a  very  large  question 
arises,  which  must  not  be  permitted  to  slip  through  Par- 
liament without  being  handled,  weighed,  and  examined. 

For  two  centuries  after  the  death  of  Julius  Caesar, 
writers  of  great  ability  and  eloquence  endeavored  to 
teach  morality  to  the  senate  and  people  of  Rome.  The 
old  gods,  who  had  never,  either  by  precept  or  example, 
encouraged  a  strict  observance  of  morals,  had  lost  their 
authority.     The  god  of  Epicurus  was 

A  jolly  god,  who  left  mankind  alone ; 
Who  unconcerned  could  at  rebellion  sit, 
And  wink  at  crimes  he  did  himself  commit. 

In  place  of  divine  rulers,  Cicero,  Seneca,  and  Marcus 
Aurelius  endeavored,  by  elegant  exhortations  and  pun- 
gent sentences,  to  inculcate  morality.  Their  influence 
in  reforming  morals  was  scarcely  perceptible.^  A  more 
dissolute  society  than  that  of  Rome  could  not  well  be. 
The  philosophers  had  entirely  failed  to  improve  the 
morals  of  the  Roman  Empire. 

After  the  death  of  Jesus  Christ  upon  the  cross,  a  new 
society  arose. 

i  See  Lecky's  admirable  *  History  of  European  Morals/  from  Augus- 
tus to  Charlemagne,  vol.  i. 


132  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

Pliny,  the  Proconsul  of  Trajan  in  Bithynia,  informs 
the  Emperor  of  the  existence  of  a  sect  called  Christians, 
and  asks  for  his  instructions.  He  states  that  this  sect 
having  been  denounced  to  him,  he  had  taken  pains  to 
ascertain  their  doctrines  and  their  conduct.  They  ad- 
mitted that  they  sung  early  in  the  morning  a  hymn  to 
Christ  as  to  God,  but  they  affirmed  that  their  teaching 
was  innocent  and  irreproachable.  They  taught  the 
members  of  their  society  to  refrain  from  theft,  from  rob- 
bery, and  from  adultery ;  to  act  with  punctual  good 
faith  to  their  neighbors,  and  to  ]-estore  scrupulously  to 
its  owner  any  property  confided  to  their  care. 

Two  maid-servants  who  belonged  to  the  society,  and 
who,  like  Rhoda  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  waited 
upon  them,  were  put  to  the  torture  by  Plin}',  but  noth- 
ing further  was  extracted  from  these  noble-hearted 
damsels.  Pliny  thereupon  desired  the  Christian  cul- 
prits to  worship  the  Emperor  and  to  curse  Chiist. 
Those  who  did  so  were  dismissed ;  those  who  refused 
he  ordered  to  be  led  to  execution. 

The  Emperor  Trajan  approved  of  what  had  been 
done,  but  desired  that  no  search  for  Christians  should 
be  made,  and  that  they  should  only  be  punished  when 
duly  convicted  of  worshipping  Christ,  and  of  refusing  to 
adore  the  divinity  of  the  Emperor. 

Since  the  time  that  Christ  began  to  teach,  morality 
has  been  connected  with  religion.  Christianity  has 
been  persecuted,  and  persecutor;  has  been  perverted 
and  corrupted.  Alva  put  to  death  his  thousands ;  Cran- 
mcr  consigned  to  the  flames  a  maiden  guilty  of  some 
error  in  theology ;  Calyin  burnt  Servetus,  and  defended 
the  thesis  that  erroi*s  in  belief  ought  to  be  punished  by 
the  civil  magistrate  ;  Presbyterians  have  been  oppressed 
in  the  Old  World,  and  have  been  oppressor  in  the  New ; 


GRATTAN  — NATIONAL  EDUCATION.  133 

but  in  spite  of  all  alterations  of  fortune,  in  spite  of 
wickedness  in  high  places,  amid  the  affliction  of  the 
good  and  the  triumph  of  the  bad,  the  divorce  of  religion 
and  morality  has  never  taken  place. 

In  Ireland,  religious  teaching  cannot  be  given  by  a 
Protestant  Established  Church.  The  church  of  a  minor- 
ity cannot  teach  the  mass  of  the  people.  Mr.  Grattan 
said,  '  I  love  the  Protestants ;  I  love  the  Catholics ;  I 
love  the  Presbyterians :  and  my  affection  only  abates 
when  the  members  of  those  communions  hate  each 
other.'  Mr.  Grattan  might  have  added,  with  St.  Paul, 
'  and  I  will  very  gladly  spend  and  be  spent  for  you  ; 
though  the  more  abundantly  I  love  you  the  less  I  be 
loved.'  1 

Grattan  also  said,  more  than  seventy  years  ago,  that 
as  the  Roman  Catholic  priests  must  be  the  teachers  of 
the  people,  he  wished  them  to  be  well-informed;  and, 
as  the  classes  from  which  the  priesthood  were  drawn 
were  not  usually  able  to  afford  a  good  education  for 
their  sons,  he  thought  it  would  be  wise  to  found  a 
college  for  their  instruction.  Hence  the  College  of 
Maynooth. 

Some  men  think  we  have  grown  wiser  since  those 
dark  ages  —  of  Grattan  and  of  Burke,  of  Fox  and  Pitt. 

Yet  I  confess  I  stiU  cling  to  their  notions,  and  those 
of  their  predecessors.  I  cannot  admit  that  in  a  country 
where,  in  the  case  of  a  murder,  the  sympathy  of  the 
people  is  with  the  murderer,  and  not  with  the  sorrowing 
family  and  friends  of  the  murdered  man,  there  is  no 
need  -that  the  State  should  assist  and  promote  the 
'  teaching  of  religion.' 

Yielding,  however,  to  the  sense  of  Parliament,  that 

1  1  Corinthians,  ch.  xii. 


134  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

there  can  be  no  endowment  of  the  Roman  Catholic 
Church,  t^nd  that  even  concurrent  endowment  is  hope- 
less and  impracticable,  it  may  be  permitted  me  to  in- 
quire whether  the  doctrines  of  Christianity  cannot  be 
imparted  to  the  young  by  a  school  establishment, 
founded  on  the  system  at  present  in  force. 

The  object  and  fundamental  principle  of  the  system 
of  National  Education  in  Ireland  is  thus  officially 
stated :  — 

1.  The  object  of  the  system  of  National  Education 
is  to  afford  combined  literary  and  moral,  and  separate 
religious  instruction,  to  children  of  all  persuasions,  as 
far  as  possible,  in  the  same  school,  upon  the  fundamental 
principle,  that  no  attempt  shall  be  made  to  interfere 
with  the  peculiar  religious  tenets  of,  any  description  of 
Christian  pupils. 

Next,  as  to  the  description  of  schools. 

2.  The  schools  to  which  the  Commissioners  grant 
aid  are  divided  into  two  classes,  viz. :  —  1st,  Vested 
Schools,  of  which  there  are  two  sorts ;  namely,  those 
vested  in  the  Commissioners,  and  those  vested  in  trus- 
tees, for  the  purpose  of  being  maintained  as  National 
Schools.  2d,  Non-vested  Schools,  the  property  of  pri- 
vate individuals.  Both  these  classes  of  schools  are 
under  the  control  of  local  patrons  or  managers. 

The  rules  for  religious  and  secular  instruction  are 
thus  stated :  — 

1.  Opportunities  are  to  be  afforded  (as  hereinafter 
provided  for)  to  the  children  of  all  National  Schools 
for  receiving  such  religious  instruction  as  their  parents 
or  guardians  approve. 

2.  Religious  instruction  must  be  so  arranged,  that 
each  school  shall  bo  open  to  children  of  all  commun- 
ions; that  due  regard  be  had  to  parental  right  and 


IRELAND  — NATIONAL  EDUCATION.  135 

authority;  that,  accordingly,  no  child  be  compelled  to 
receive,  or  to  be  present  at  any  religious  instruction,  of 
which  his  parents  or  guardians  disapprove ;  and  that 
the  time  for  giving  it  be  so  fixed,  that  no  child  shall  be 
thereby,  in  effect,  excluded,  directly  or  indirectly,  from 
the  other  advantages  which  the  school  affords. 

3.  A  public  notification  of  the  times  for  religious  in- 
struction must  be  inserted  in  large  letters  in  the  '  Time 
Table '  supplied  by  the  Commissioners,  who  recommend 
that,  as  far  as  may  be  practicable,  the  general  nature 
of  such  religious  instruction  be  also  stated  therein. 

The  reading  of  the  Scriptures,  either  in  the  Protes- 
tant Authorized,  or  Douay  Version  —  the  teaching  of 
catechisms,  —  public  prayer,  —  and  all  other  religious 
exercises,  come  within  the  rules  as  to  religious  instruc- 
tion. 

Religious  instruction,  prayer,  and  all  other  religious 
exercises,  may  take  place  at  any  time,  before  and  after 
the  ordinary  school  business  (during  which  all  children, 
of  whatever  denomination  they  may  be,  are  required  to 
attend),  but  must  not  take  place  at  more  than  one  in- 
termediate time,  between  the  commencement  and  the 
close  of  the  ordinary  school  business.  The  Commis- 
sioners, however,  will  not  sanction  any  arrangement  for 
religious  instruction,  prayer,  or  other  religious  exercises 
at  an  intermediate  time,  in  cases  where  it  shall  appear 
to  them  that  such  arrangement  will  interfere  with  the 
usefulness  of  the  school,  by  preventing  children  of  any 
religious  denomination  from  availing  themselves  of  its 
advantages,  or  by  subjecting  those  in  attendance  to  any 
practical  inconvenience. 

The  following  note  to  the  13th  rule  is  of  great  im- 
portance :  — 


136  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

Note.  —  The  Commissioners  earnestly  recommend 
that  religious  instruction  shall  take  place  either  immedi- 
ately before  the  commencement,  or  immediately  after 
the  close,  of  the  ordinary  school  business  ;  and  they 
further  recommend  that,  whenever  the  patron  or  man- 
ager thinks  fit  to  have  religious  instruction  at  an 
intermediate  time,  a  separate  apartment  shall  (when 
practicable)  be  provided  for  the  reception  of  those  chil- 
dren whose  parents  or  guardians  may  disapprove  of 
their  being  present  thereat. 

It  may  be  here  observed  that  these  rules  are  far  more 
full  and  more  complete  than  the  Conscience  Clause  of 
the  Committee  of  Privy  Council  in  England. 

The  managers  or  teachers  of  a  National  School  in 
England  might  so  arrange  and  intermingle  the  secular 
and  religious  instruction  as  to  give  the  parents  no 
choice  but  either  to  leave  their  children  in  school  dur- 
ing the  hours  of  religious  instruction,  or  to  lose  their 
lessons  of  secular  instruction.  This,  it  will  be  said,  is 
not  a  probable  occurrence  ;  but,  as  such  cases  do  happen, 
it  is  well  to  guard  against  it. 

With  regard  to  management,  the  rules  of  the  Irish 
National  Board  direct  that  — 

1.  The  local  government  of  the  National  Schools  is 
vested  in  the  local  patrons  ^hereof. 

The  rides  go  on  to  declare  that  the  person  who  fii-st 
aj)plies  to  place  the  school  in  connection  with  the  Board 
becomes,  unless  otherwise  specified  in  the  application, 
the  local  patron  ;  that  the  patron  has  the  right  to  nomi- 
nate any  fit  person  to  act  in  his  place  as  the  '  local  man- 
ager ; '  that  when  a  school  is  vested  in  trustees,  they 
have  the  right  to  nominate  the  local  manager. 

The  12th  clause,  in  regard  to  management,  is  of  great 
importance.     It  provides  as  follows :  — 


IRELAND— NATIONAL  EDUCATION.  137 

'  The  local  patrons  (or  managers)  of  schools  have 
the  right  of  appointing  the  teachers,  subject  to  the 
approval  of  the  Board  as  to  character  and  general 
qualifications ;  the  local  patron  (or  managers)  have 
also  the  power  of  removing  the  teachers  of  their  own 
authority.' 

This  rule  gives  a  vast  power  to  the  local  patrons  or 
managers  —  the  landlord  or  clergyman  of  the  Episcopal 
Church,  the  Presbyterian  minister,  or,  more  frequently, 
the  parish  priest. 

Observe,  that  the  salaries  of  the  teachers  of  the  ordi- 
nary National  Schools  are  miserably  small.  In  1865, 
the  principal  teachers  of  the  2d  division  of  the  8d 
class  received,  men,  ISl. ;  women,  161. ;  or,  in  other 
words,  the  men  little  more  than  seven,  and  the  women 
little  over  six,  shillings  a  week.  Men  and  women  thus 
rewarded  for  the  devotion  of  their  whole  time  to  teach- 
ing are,  of  course,  entirely  dependent  on  the  local 
manager,  who  can  dismiss  them  at  pleasure.  If  the 
parish  priest  happen  to  be  that  local  manager,  and,  if 
he  find  the  teacher  deviating  into  broad  Christian  prin- 
ciple or  rising  to  the  higher  regions  of  science,  he  may 
dismiss  the  teacher  or  school-mistress  at  once  to  poverty 
and  destitution. 

But  Cardinal  Cullen  and  his  colleagues  are  not  satis- 
fied with  this  degree  of  denominational  exclusiveness. 

There  are  mixed  schools,  which  are  attended  by 
24,000  Protestant  children  in  various  proportions ;  in 
some  ten,  in  some  five,  in  some  one  or  two. 

In  many  of  these  schools,  images  of  the  Virgin  Mary 
and  of  saints  are  enclosed  in  cases,  or  closets,  and  only 
exhibited  at  the  hours  of  religious  instruction.  The 
Roman  Catholic  bishops  require  that  these  images  should 
be  exhibited  at  all  hours,  with  a  view,   no  doubt,  to 


138  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

induce  the  Protestant  children  to  pay  their  reverence 
and  devotion  to  Roman  Catholic  saints.  They  require, 
also,  that  Protestant  teachers  should  not  be  permitted 
to  teach  reading  and  writing,  arithmetic  and  geography, 
in  schools  where  the  pupils  are  altogether  or  mainly 
Roman  Catholic.  And  this  in  schools  where,  according 
to  the  report  of  18G5,  of  303,723?.  Us.  dd.,  received 
by  the  teaching  staff  of  the  schools,  only  16-95  per 
cent  was  locally  provided,  while  83*05  per  cent  was 
provided  by  the  State.  Is  not  tliis  too  much  for  the 
priesthood  to  ask? 

Parliament  may  consistently  give  large  sums  for 
National  Schools  in  England,  where  a  religion  defined 
by  the  Church  in  Convocation,  adopted  by  the  State, 
and  confined  within  bounds,  approved  by  Parliament, 
and  interpreted  by  judges  named  by  the  Crown,  is 
taught  at  the  expense,  partly  of  the  State,  and  partly 
of  local  subscribers.  But  the  Roman  Catholic  prel- 
ates require  that  the  State  should  furnish  eighty  three 
per  cent  of  the  salaries  of  teachers,  the  majority  of 
whom  will  be  constrained  by  the  priests  to  stigmatize 
Protestants  as  rebels  to  Divine  authority  and  objects 
of  Divine  wrath;  perhaps  to  teach  that  William  III. 
had  no  right  to  the  throne,  and  that  his  successor  is  a 
usurper.  Surely  the  House  of  Commons  of  the  United 
Kingdom  can  never  sanction  such  a  scheme  I 

The  system  of  National  Education  in  Ireland,  intro- 
duced by  the  Government  in  1831,  under  the  sanction 
of  Lord  Grey,  by  the  instrumentality  of  Mr.  Stanley, 
and  with  the  co-operation  of  Archbishop  Wliately,  was 
no  branch  ^  of  the  poisonous  tree  of  Protestant  as- 
cendency. Its  object  and  intention  was  to  unite  the 
Protestant  Episcopalian,  the  Roman  Catholic,  and  the 
Presbyterian  in  one  scheme  of  secular  and  religious  in- 


IRELAND  — NATIONAL  EDUCATION.  139 

struction ;  to  leave  religious  teaching  free ;  to  respect 
the  rights  of  conscience,  and  to  persuade  all  commun- 
ions to  live  in  harmony  and  peace. 

The  principle  of  the  National  School  system  of  Ire- 
land is,  we  may  conclude,  one  befitting  the  State,  which 
is  bound  to  provide  instruction,  not  for  the  children  of 
one  church,  or  one  sect  only,  but  for  all.  But  it  is 
open  to  the  following  objections :  — 

1.  In  the  non-vested  schools,  the  Roman  Catholic 
parish  priest  is  frequently  the  patron,  and  holds  the 
school-master  in  very  servile  subjection.  A  very  effi- 
cient school-master,  popular  with  the  scholars,  may  be 
dismissed  at  will,  if  he  does  not  follow  the  directions 
of  the  priest. 

2.  The  school-masters  and  school-mistresses  are  di- 
vided into  three  classes. 

The  payment  of  the  third  class,  as  already  stated, 
is  very  inadequate. 

Having  no  dwelling-house,  and  often  a  very  wretched 
school-house,  their  teaching  is  much  disturbed  and  re- 
strained by  physical  discomfort  and  inadequate  means. 

The  remedies  for  these  deficiencies  are  not  far  to 
seek. 

The  school-masters  and  school-mistresses  should  be 
more  liberally  paid.  They  should  have  comfortable 
dwelling-houses,  and  adequate  school-houses,  built  and 
repaired  by  the  Board.  They  should  be  independent 
of  the  caprice  of  the  patron,  and  not  liable  to  be  re- 
moved without  the  consent  of  the  Board. 

With  these  changes,  and  400,000/.  provided  by  Par- 
liament, for  twenty  years  to  come,  a  well-educated 
generation  would  form  the  majority  of  the  Irish  people. 

I  am  almost  afraid  to  avow  that  I  prefer  the  simple 
words  of  Christ  to  any  dogmatic  interpretation  of  them, 


140  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

whether  taught  by  the  Pope,  by  Luther,  or  by  Calvin. 
If  I  am  in  error  in  this  respect,  I  am  in  eiTor  with  Dr. 
Arnold,  with  Dean  Milman,  and  with  still  higher  author- 
ities. 

The  Pope,  who  was  called  upon  to  judge  between 
F(3nelon  and  Bossuet,  said,  F^nelon  has  erred  by  having 
too  much  of  the  love  of  God ;  Bossuet,  by  having  too 
little  of  the  love  of  his  neighbor.  I  prefer  the  error  of 
Fdnelon  to  that  of  Bossuet.  Nay,  more,  I  think  that 
the  spirit  of  the  Christian  religion  is  to  be  found,  not  in 
dogma,  but  in  reverence  to  God,  and  love  of  our  neigh- 
bor. In  my  opinion,  F^nelon  and  Tillotson  were  better 
Christians  than  Bossuet  and  Laud.'  Men  have  endeav- 
ored to  ascertain,  by  metaphysical  research,  whether 
the  Son  is  of  the  same  substance  as  the  Father,  whether 
the  Holy  Ghost  proceeds  from  the  Father  onlj^,  or 
from  the  Father  and  the  Son.  These  are  subjects  upon 
which  men  may  differ,  and  yet  respect  one  another. 

But  there  are  matters  of  infinite  importance,  upon 
which  the  words  of  Christ  are  plain  to  all  understand- 
ings. 

He  taught  his  disciples  to  love  one  another.  He 
taught  them  to  pray  to  God  to  forgive  us  our  trespasses, 
as  we  forgive  them  that  trespass  against  us.^  He 
taught  that  when  the  traveller  was  robbed  and  wounded, 
it  was  not  the  priest,  nor  the  Levite,  but  the  heterodox 
Samaritan  who  relieved  him.  He  pointed  out  that  tlie 
Samaritan  was  the  neighbor  of  the  wounded  man.  He 
said,  *  Let  those  who  love  me  obey  my  commandments.* 

Those  commandments  were  not  dogmatical  definitions 


1  Singularly  enough,  our  Church  Catechism,  in  its  paraplirase  of  the 
Lord's  l*ruycr,  omits  tliis  great  lesson,  and  inserts  a  passage  which  has 
no  counterpart  iu  that  divine  prayer. 


IRELAND  — CHURCH  PROPERTY.  141 

of  the  nature  of  God,  but  practical  and  clear  expositions 
of  great  truths. 

Let  us  teach  these  great  truths  to  the  people  of 
Ireland,  and  we  may  hope  that  they  will  cease  to 
applaud  murder. 

In  wishing  to  see  Christianity  thus  taught,  whether 
by  Protestant  or  Roman  Catholic  teachers,  I  may  be 
accused  of  wishing  to  promote  '  indiscriminate  endow- 
ment.' 

Be  it  so  ;  I  know  that  tares  must  be  mingled  with 
the  wheat,  and  I  am  willing,  like  our  Great  Master,  to 
see  them  both  grow  together  till  the  harvest.  God, 
who  has  neither  our  imperfect  vision,  nor  our  limited 
charity,  will  punish  the  obstinate  reprobate  and  forgive 
the  repentant  sinner. 

Let  us  now  take  stock,  and  compute  what  means  will 
remain  to  Parliament,  if  they  should  hereafter  deter- 
mine to  consider,  in  an  impartial  spirit,  the  welfare  of 
Ireland  as  part  of  the  United  Kingdom. 

1.  A  surplus  which  we  may  fairly  take  at  six  millions, 
remaining  from  church  property,  after  discharging  all 
the  life-interests  and  commutations  charged  upon  it  by 
the  Act  of  1869. 

2.  A  yearly  grant,  which  has  of  late  amounted  to 
from  300,000Z.  to  360,000/.  on  an  average,  voted  by 
Parliament  for  National  Education  in  Ireland. 

The  surplus  of  the  late  Established  Church  has  been 
increased,  we  are  told  on  authority,  by  a  sum  of 
4,000,000/.,  derived  from  the  credit  of  the  Exchequer. 
This  sum  is,  according  to  the  Irish  Church  Act,  to  be 
applied  '  mainly '  to  the  relief  of  '  unavoidable  calam- 
ity.'i 

1  Act  of  Parliament,  1869. 


142  RECOLLECTIONS  AND   SUGGESTIONS. 

Never  were  4,000,000/.  so  recklessly  thrown  away. 

The  application  of  public  or  local  taxes  to  the  relief 
of  absolute  destitution,  whether  of  the  old  and  infirm, 
the  sick  or  the  lame,  the  blind  or  the  insane,  may  well 
be  defended  against  Dr.  Chalmers  and  other  writers  of 
great  authority. 

But  when  the  State  gives  relief  for  physical  or 
mental  disease  to  those  who  are  able  to  paj^  for  their 
medical  care,  or  who  have  relations  and  friends  of  suffi- 
cient means  to  help  them,  the  State  does  a  great  mis- 
chief. Imposture  is  promoted  to  a  large  extent ;  the 
charitable  zeal  of  relations  and  neighbors  is  dried  up ; 
a  great  rush  is  made  on  the  public  funds,  and  the  over- 
whelmed tax-payer,  scarcely  able  to  meet  the  demands 
of  the  collector  by  unremitting  industry,  sinks  under 
the  weight  of  the  fraudulent  mendicant  and  insane 
drunkard. 

Yet  such  is  the  character  of  many  of  those  objects 
of  charity  who  are  sufferers  from  what  is  called  in  the 
late  Act  of  Parliament  *  unavoidable  calamity.' 

Let  us,  at  all  events,  take  care  to  substitute  the  term 
*  partly'  for  the  term  *  mainly.'  Otherwise  Roman 
Catholic  charities  will  absorb  and  misapply  the  whole 
of  the  funds  which  the  wisdom  of  Lord  Cairns  has 
saved  from  dilapidation. 

In  the  *  Report  of  the  Commissioners  of  National 
Education  in  Ireland  for  1865,'  called  the  Thirty-second 
Report,  we  have  an  account  of  the  number  of  children 
on  the  rolls  for  the  year  ending  December  31,  1865. 
They  amounted  to  922,084.  The  total  number  of 
schools  in  operation  was  6,372.  The  calculation  made 
by  estimate  of  the  number  of  children  of  various 
denominations  for  the  entire  year,  gives  the  following 
results :  — 


IRELAND  — NATIONAL  EDUCATION. 


143 


Established  Church      61,492 

Roman  Catholics 752,328  .  ,j,^^^j  ^22  084 

Presbyterians 101,616  |           '        '       • 

Other  Persuasions 6,648  J 

The  following  list  contains  the  names  of  the  Com- 
missioners  of  National  Education  in  Ireland :  — 


Rt.  Hon.  Lord  Bellew. 

Rev.  Dr.  Henry,  President,  Queen's 
College,  Belfast. 

Rt,  Hon.  Alexander  Macdonnell. 

The  Lord  Bishop  of  Derry  and 
Raphoe. 

Hon.  Judge  Longfield. 

Rt.  Hon.  Mr.  Justice  O'Hagan. 

Rt.  Hon.  the  Earl  of  Dunraven. 

Rt.  Hon.  Lord  Chief  Justice  Com- 
mon Pleas  (Monahan). 

Rt.  Hon.  Lord  Chief  Baron 
(Pigot). 


The  Marquess  of  Kildare. 

Rt.    Hon.    the    Lord    Chancellor 

(Brady). 
James  Gibson,  Esq. 
Rt.    Hon.    the    Attorney- General 

(Lawson). 
Rev.  John  Hall,  D.D. 
Laurence  Waldron,  Esq. 
John  Lentaigne,  Esq. 
John  O'Hagan,  Esq.,  Q.C. 
Hon.  Thomas  Preston,  D.L. 
Rt.  Hon.  Mr.  Justice  Fitzgerald. 
James  William  Murland,  Esq. 


The  then  Lord  Chancellor  (Brady)  has  since  that 
time  ceased  to  be  so;  and  that  office  is  now  held  by- 
Mr.  Justice  O'Hagan.  But  both  these  learned  persons 
remain  Commissioners  of  National  Education.  It  is 
said  that  the  Board  have  relied  on  returns  often  inaccu- 
rate.    But  these  errors  will  not  affect  the  general  result. 

The  funds  for  education  are  so  fairly  applied  in  Ulster, 
that  the  proportion  of  Roman  Catholics  to  Protestants 
in  the  population  returns,  and  the  proportion  of  Roman 
Catholics  to  Protestants  in  the  National  Schools,  are 
nearly  identical. 

Let  us,  then,  supply  the  want  of  a  National  Church 
Establishment  by  a  more  complete  National  School 
Establishment,  Of  the  benefits  of  which  all  communions, 
Protestant  and  Catholic,  may  partake. 

The  360,000Z.  of  tithe  rent-charge,  instead  of  being 
given  up  to  the  landlords,  after  fifty-two  years,  might 


144  KECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

well  be  maintained  as  a  provision  for  National  Educa- 
tion. Thus  a  great  question  will  be  solved,  and  a  largo 
sum  appropriated  for  Irish  purposes. 

I  now  approach  the  important  and  critical  question 
of  the  Land  Tenure  of  Ireland.  The  evils  of  the  present 
law  of  landlord  and  tenant  are  much  complained  of,  and 
great  oppression  is  in  some  cases  exercised.  Two  kinds  of 
remedies  have  been  proposed.  The  first  kind  consists 
of  proposals  to  abolish  practical  abuses,  to  favor  tenures 
of  thirty-one  years,  to  oblige  the  landlord  to  compensate 
the  tenant  for  all  the  practical  improvements  he  has 
made,  and  to  pay  for  the  value  of  the  house  he  has 
erected.  The  other  is  far  different ;  it  takes  for  gi-anted 
that  all  which  has  been  done  for  the  last  seven  hundred 
years  is  usurpation  and  tyranny  ;  that,  consequently,  the 
Acts  of  Elizabeth,  of  James  I.,  of  Charles  II.,  and  of 
George  I.  are  null  and  void,  and  it  would  therefore  give 
the  land  to  the  occupier,  and  restore  that  state  of  jDOSses- 
sion  by  the  strongest  which  prevailed  before  the  Norman 
Conquest.  The  object,  how<3ver  disguised,  is,  in  fact,  to 
drive  out  all  Protestant  owners,  and  to  put  an  end  to 
British  rule  in  Ireland.  I  need  not  say  that,  in  my  opin- 
ion, the  first  class  of  remedies,  when  properly  defined 
and  justly  applied,  ought  to  be  cordially  adopted,  and 
the  latter  class  peremptorily  rejected.  Every  indication 
favors  the  conclusion  tliat  Government  will  act  with 
temper  and  wisdom. 

Lord  Hartington  says :  — 

'  It  is  not  only  the  property  of  Irish  landlords  which 
is  at  stake,  it  is  not  only  the  property  of  English  land- 
lords, but  it  is  property  of  all  kinds  which  will  be  at 
stake.'  Lord  Clarendon  has  spoken  firmly  and  judi- 
ciously, both  as  to  the  wrongs  of  the  tenants  and  the 
rights  of  the  landlords.     In  fine,  unless  the  Government 


TENANT-RIGHT.  145 

and  the  House  of  Commons  should  adopt  some  of  the  rev- 
olutionary plans  of  the  Irish  newspapers,  property  of  all 
kinds  will  not  be  at  stake.  I  quite  admit  that  if  Irish 
landlords  are  robbed  of  their  property,  no  other  kind 
of  property  will  be  safe ;  but  no  man  of  sense  imagines 
that  the  Government  will  be  wild  enough  to  propose 
such  a  robbery,  or  the  House  of  Commons  unprincipled 
enough  to  sanction  it. 

Supposing,  however,  the  Government  to  confine  itself, 
as  Lord  Spencer  intimated,  to  what  is  practicable,  the 
task  is  still  difficult,  though  far  from  impossible. 

Guicciardini,  an  experienced  politician  and  an  accu- 
rate historian,  says  that  statesmen  commit  no  greater 
mistakes  than  when  they  apply  a  successful  precedent 
to  circumstances  of  a  different  nature. 

There  is  much  danger  of  such  a  mistake  in  Ireland. 
In  the  north  of  Ireland,  tenant-right  is  the  established 
custom.  Lord  Granard  and  others  say,  '  Let  us  transfer 
the  custom  of  the  north  to  the  south  of  Ireland.  It  is 
successful  in  the  north,  therefore  it  will  be  successful  in 
the  south.' 

But  stop  a  moment.  Ulster  was  colonized  by  the 
Scotch.  We  are  told,  on  good  authority,  that  the  Irish 
were  not  sufficiently  industrious,  and  the  English  not 
sufficiently  used  to  hard  fare  and  poor  dwellings  to 
make  good  colonists.  The  Scotch  were  accustomed  to 
work  hard  and  to  fare  hard;  they  improved  the  soil, 
they  built  fit  dwellings  ;  one  Scotch  tenant  succeeding 
another,  came  into  the  occupation  of  land  well  culti- 
vated, and  farm-buildings  stored  with  corn  and  imple- 
ments. He  could,  therefore,  afford  to  pay  the  outgoing 
tenant  for  the  good-will  as  well  as*a  shopkeeper  coming 
to  succeed  a  successful  tradesman  in  Bond  Street  or  in 

Regent  Street. 

10 


146  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

But  shall  we  transfer  this  pustom  of  Ulster  to  Mini- 
ster and  Connaught  ?  In  the  first  place,  although  it 
may  be  equitable  to  sanction  bylaw  a  custom  established 
for  generations,  it  is  by  no  means  equitable  to  introduce 
compulsory  copyhold  where  tenancy  from  year  to  year 
has  been  the  general  custom. 

In  the  next  place,  tenant-right  may  be  practically  a 
custom  quite  unfitted  for  Kerry  or  Cork.  A  tenant  may 
have  left  his  marshy  land  undrained  ;  his  fences  full  of 
gaps,  by  which  his  cattle,  tired  of  the  sour  grass  of  the 
meadow,  may  break  into  the  field  of  oats  ;  his  farm- 
buildings  may  be  ruinous  ;  his  implements  broken  and 
antiquated.  Still  a  farmer,  eager  to  hold  land,  may  pay 
a  few  pounds  for  the  occupation,  and  he  may  go  on, 
leaving  the  marshes  undrained,  the  ploughs  broken,  the 
fences  full  of  gaps.  Is  the  landlord  to  be  bound  to 
respect  the  tenant-right  of  the  thriftless,  lazy  occupier  ? 
Is  such  a  man  to  be  compared  to  the  active,  industrious 
tenant  of  Ulster  ?  Because  a  custom  succeeds  with  the 
landlords  and  tenants  in  Ulster,  is  it  to  be  made  compul- 
sory in  Cork  and  Kerry  ?  This  were  to  adopt  the  prac- 
tice of  workmen  upon  strike,  when  they  insist  that  the 
man  whose  labor  is  worth  to  the  master  9s.  a  week, 
should  have  the  same  wages  as  a  man  whose  work  is 
worth  308.  a  week.  Yet  such  is,  if  I  understand  it,  the 
principle  adopted  by  Mr.  Butt  as  the  Hag  of  a  great 
national  movement. 

An  illustration  occurs  to  me.  Some  persons  wonder 
how  it  is  that  since  the  Italians  have  obtained  indepen- 
dence and  freedom,  the  crime  of  assassination  is  still  so 
common. 

The  answer  is,  that  habits  and  usages  transmitted 
from  father  to  son  are  not  changed  by  the  best  written 
constitution.     Lord  Holland,  when  he  was  asked  by 


CUSTOM   OF  ULSTER.  147 

Murat,  then  King  of  Naples,  to  furnisli  him  with  a  con- 
stitution, replied  in  effect,  '  You  might  as  well  ask  me 
to  build  a  tree.' 

It  is  well  known  that  the  Papal  government  pun- 
ished severely  men  who  ate  a  chicken  on  a  Friday,  but 
were  very  lenient  to  robbers,  brigands,  and  assassins. 
A  gentleman  who  acted  as  Procurator-General  at  Rome 
when  the  First  Napoleon  assumed  the  government,  in- 
formed me  that  in  one  year  there  were  reported  to  him 
two  thousand  cases  of  assassination !  that  term  compre- 
hending, in  Italian  phrase,  cases  of  killing,  maiming, 
cutting,  and  wounding  with  intent,  &c. 

Does  any  one  expect  such  habits  to  be  changed  in  a 
year,  or  in  twenty  years  ?  The  saying  that  '  Rome  was 
not  built  in  a  day '  and  other  similar  proverbs  show  that 
the  popular  mind  is  not  so  unreasonable  as  political 
speculation. 

Another  illustration  occurs.  In  the  sixteenth  cen- 
tury, the  Spaniards  brought  from  Peru  heaps  of  gold  and 
silver.  Spain  declined.  Men  of  grave  authority  said 
'  See  how  the  importation  of  gold  and  silver  ruins  a 
country.'  In  the  nineteenth  century,  the  United  States 
discovered  in  California,  and  Great  Britain  in  Austraha, 
immense  quantities  of  gold.  The  United  States  flour- 
ished. Great  Britain  flourished ;  California  and  Aus- 
tralia rose  to  unheard-of  prosperity.  How  ^ould  this 
be?  Historians  had  forgotten  to  mention  that  Spain 
imported  in  the  sixteenth  century  not  only  gold  and 
silver,  but  political  and  religious  despotism.  Spaniards, 
no  longer  free,  became,  as  Homer  says,  only  half  men. 
Thus  it  appears,  as  our  grandsires  tell  us,  that  '  one 
man's  meat  is  another  man's  poison.'  Thus  it  may  hap- 
pen that  what  makes  Ulster  rich  may  make  Munster 
poorer  than  before. 


148  RECOLLECTIONS  AND   SUGGESTIONS. 

The  difference  in  the  price  of  land  in  the  county  of 
Down,  where  it  fetches  thirty  years'  purchase,  and  in 
the  county  of  Kerry,  where  it  scarcely  reaches  twenty- 
five,  shows  the  effect,  not  of  tenant-right,  but  of  habits 
of  order  and  industry  on  the  one  side,  laziness  and  im- 
providence on  the  other. 

The  '  Times  '  newspaper  has  a  very  intelligent  corre- 
spondent in  Ireland,  who  is  charged  especially  to  report 
on  the  land  question.  His  letters  remind  me  of  the 
saying  of  a  witty  diplomatist  who,  in  the  last  century, 
returned  from  time  to  time  to  England,  his  native 
country. 

'  When  I  arrive  in  England,'  he  said,  '  if  I  open  my 
eyes  and  shut  my  ears,  I  think  the  country  very  flour- 
ishing. But  if  I  shut  my  eyes  and  open  my  ears,  I  find 
that  England  is  the  most  wretched  country  on  the  face 
of  the  earth.' 

The  '  Times  '  correspondent  very  properly  opens  his 
eyes.  He  sees  much  improvement  —  farmers  selling 
their  cattle  and  their  crops  to  great  advantage,  laborers 
well  clothed,  earning  8s,  or  9s.  a  week  where  their 
fathers  earned  with  difficulty  58. 

He  then  opens  his  ears,  and  forthwith  imbibes  a  storm 
of  complaints.  '  Our  landlord  is  very  kind,  and  never 
raises  his  rents.  But  what  if  he  should  suddenly  turn 
tyrant  ?  and  what  if,  when  we  ask  for  a  lease,  he  should 
choose  to  have  the  land  valued,  and  demand  a  higher 
rent  than  we  now  pay?'  Then,  as  to  the  laborers, 
•they  are  tolerably  well  off,  much  better  housed,  and 
much  better  clothed  than  they  used  to  be ;  but  they 
think  that  eight  centuries  ago  their  ancestors  possessed 
the  land,  and  that,  as  they  are  the  people  of  Ireland, 
they  ought  to  possess  it  now.' 

To  grumble  is  the  prescriptive  right  of  Englishmen, 


TENANTS  AND  LANDLORDS.         149 

and  on  principles  of  equality,  cannot  be  refused  to  Irish- 
men. But  to  legislate  on  such  vague  notions  would  be 
most  unsafe. 

Lord  Portsmouth  says,  with  just  pride  and  satisfac- 
tion, '  Since  1822,  the  experiment  of  thirty-one  years' 
leases,  with  free  liberty  to  sell  them,  and  practically 
vesting  all  buildings  in  the  tenant,  has  been  tried  on 
my  estates  in  the  county  of  Wexford,  with  the  follow- 
ing results :  —  Badly  cultivated  patches  of  land,  with 
wretched  hovels  on  them,  have  been  changed  into  well- 
cultivated  farms,  with  first-rate  homesteads.  The  rental 
has  more  than  doubled,  is  punctually  paid,  instead  of 
irregularly  paid.  Discontent  and  misery  existed  in 
1822 :  prosperity  and  contentment  exist  in  1869. 
Vinegar  Hill  was  the  head-quarters  of  the  Rebellion  in 
1798  ;  now  no  more  loyal  and  contented  population 
exists  than  that  which  surrounds  it.'  ^ 

This,  however,  is  not  '  fixity  of  tenure.'  In  fact, 
'  fixity  of  tenure '  is  but  another  term  for  property  in 
land,  which  the  agitators  propose  to  take  from  the 
owner  and  give  to  the  occupier. 

A  writer  in  the  '  Daily  News  '  very  sensibly  remarks, 
that  fixity  of  tenure  would  '  diminish  progress,'  and 
'  stereotype  desolation.'  '  The  Spectator '  seems  to  have 
no  objection  to  '  desolation,'  and  saj^s  that  '  the  more 
wealth  Ireland  has  accumulated,  the  more  loudly  and 
bitterly  she  has  protested  against  our  rule.'  But  surely 
it  is  not  the  business  of  Parliament  to  '  stereotype  deso- 
lation,' to  stop  the  '  accumulation  of  wealth,'  and  to 
foster  the  agrarian  murders  which,  instead  of  being 
stopped,  would  be  promoted  by  such  legislation. 

In  the  midst  of  the  conflicting  evidence  of  his  eyes, 

1  Letter  to  the  '  Times,'  September  11, 1869. 


150  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

and  of  his  ears,  the  '  Times '  commissioner  arrives  at  a 
very  rational  conclusion.  After  stating  the  case  of  Mr. 
Pollok,  who,  as  a  landlord,  has  greatly  improved  his 
land  at  his  own  expense,  the  commissioner  continues 
thus :  — '  Yet,  on  the  other  hand,  in  the  case  of  these 
village  communities,  how  idle  it  is  to  say,  that  it  is  con- 
sonant to  justice  to  abandon  them  to  the  rules  of  the 
common  law,  to  ignore  the  existence  of  the  property 
they  have  created,  to  subject  them  to  eviction  without 
full  compensation,  or  without  an  equivalent  prolonga- 
tion of  tenure.  He  evidently  will  be  the  true  states- 
man, and  will  be  entitled  to  claim  the  merit  of  solving 
this  complicated  problem  justly,  who,  recognizing  the 
coexistence  of  these  modes  of  tenure,  and  the  variety 
and  conflicts  of  rights  under  them,  shall  devise  a  law 
that  shall  be  applicable  to  each,  and,  as  far  as  human 
legislation  can  go,  shall  protect  the  interests  arising 
under  both,  and  shall  then  give  them  complete  freedom. 
Without  venturing  to  dogmatize,  I  am,  not  without  hope 
that  a  reform  of  this  kind  is  quite  feasible,  without 
endangering,  in  any  rational  sense,  the  rights  of  prop- 
erty.' 

This  is  the  result  arrived  at  by  an  intelligent  observer 
acted  upon  by  all  he  sees,  and  all  he  hears,  but  reserv- 
ing his  powers  of  reasoning  and  sense  of  justice. 

To  sum  up  shortly  the  whole  matter,  we  may  say, 
'  Property  has  its  duties  as  well  as  its  rights  ;  *  let  those 
duties  be  enforce^  by  law. 

But '  Property  has  its  rights  as  well  as  its  duties ;  *  let 
those  rights  be  preserved  by  law. 

In  point  of  fact,  the  attempts  made  to  overthrow  the 
barriers  of  law  and  prescription,  by  pure  reasoning,  are 
flimsy  and  shallow  enough.  Fii-st,  it  is  said  that  great 
oppression  is  exercised  by  the  landlords.     But  as  every 


RELIGION  OF  LANDLORDS.  151 

impartial  inquirer  finds  that  this  charge  of  oppression, 
true  and  revolting  as  it  is,  does  not  practically  apply  to 
more  than  one  in  fifty  of  the  landlords,  it  is  absurd  to 
say  that  fifty  shall  be  deprived  of  their  property  be- 
cause one  of  them  has  been  guilty  of  oppression.  Then 
it  is  said  that  the  proprietors  are  Protestants,  while  the 
majority  of  the  occupiers  and  laborers  are  Roman  Catho- 
lics. This  is  in  effect  to  propose  a  new  religious  dis- 
ability ;  to  make  an  odious  inquisition  into  religious 
faith ;  to  introduce  a  new  element  of  discord  into  Ire- 
land, when,  for  forty  years,  harmony,  good-will,  and 
religious  equality  have  been  the  objects  of  all  wise 
statesmen.  Nor  could  the  rule  be  restricted  in  opera- 
tion. For,  if  the  Duke  of  Devonshire  and  the  Duke  of 
Leinster  are  not  to  hold  property  in  Ireland,  because 
they  profess  a  faith  differing  from  that  of  the  majority, 
how  can  the  Duke  of  Norfolk  and  Lord  Arundel  be 
permitted  to  own  land  in  England? 

It  is  not  even  pretended  that  Protestant  land-owners 
in  Ireland  are  worse  landlords  than  Roman  Catholics. 

But  lastly,  it  is  urged,  that  the  titles  of  the  Irish 
land-owners  are  derived  from  the  confiscation  of  prop- 
erty held  by  ancient  Irish  chiefs,  and  forfeited  by  re- 
bellion. 

No  one,  however,  who  has  the  slightest  regard  for 
the  peace  of  the  country,  will  go  back  seven  centuries, 
to  inquire  what  lands  were  declared  forfeit  by  Henry 
II.,  by  Henry  VIII.,  by  Elizabeth,  by  James  I.,  by 
Charles  II.,  and  by  William  III.  Still  less  will  any  one 
pretend  to  point  out  the  heirs  of  the  expelled  rebels. 

Upon  this  question  there  can  be  no  compromise. 
Either  British  rule  in  Ireland  must  be  renounced,  and 
all  that  has  been  done  to  improve  and  civilize,  for  the 
last  forty  years,  must  be  exchanged  for  anarchy,  blood- 


v-^ 


152  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

shed,  and  desolation,  or  the  law  must  be  quietly 
amended,  and  steadily  maintained  under  the  authoiity 
of  the  Queen. 

Ireland  must  be  governed  by  the  British  Parliament, 
which  cannot  abdicate  its  supremacy  ;  which  must  pro- 
tect life  and  property ;  must  reject  frantic  theories  and 
treasonable  projects ;  must  punish  the  wrong-doer,  and 
throw  its  shield  over  the  peaceable  subject. 

Yet,  rejecting  all  these  theories  as  impracticable,  in- 
finite care  must  be  taken  to  protect  the  real  rights  of 
the  Irish  tenant. 

Upon  this  difficult  land  question,  I  suggested,  in  my 
third  letter  to  Mr.  Chichester  Fortescue,  that  every 
tenancy  less  than  a  yearl}-  tenanc}''  should  hereafter 
be  by  law  a  yearly  tenancy. 

That  any  contract  between  landlord  and  tenant,  by 
which  the  tenant  agrees  to  give  up  his  holding  on  any 
other  terms  than  those  in  force  in  the  case  of  a  lease,  or 
of  a  yearly  tenancy,  shall  be  utterly  illegal,  and  ipso 
facto  void. 

That  upon  a  notice  to  quit,  the  case  of  the  tenant 
shall  be  heard,  as  usual,  and  that  he  shall  be  empowered 
to  bring  forward  evidence*  to  show  the  improvements 
he  had  made  on  his  farm,  and  the  buildings  which  he 
had  erected  at  his  own  expense. 

That  the  chairman  of  quarter  sessions  should  be  au- 
thorized by  law  to  accompany  his  decree  by  an  award 
compelling  the  payment  of  compensation  for  the  value 
of  the  improvements  made,  and  the  buildings  erected, 
or  granting  the  tenant  power,  equivalent  to  what  is 
called  tenant-right,  of  selling  the  good-will  of  his  farm 
to  any  other  person. 

I  added  —  *  The  chairman  might  also,  I  think,  be 
empowered  to  quash  the  ejectment,  and  to  direct  the 


TENANCY   OF  LAND.  153 

grant  of  a  lease  of  twenty-one  years  by  the  landlord, 
in  terms  to  be  settled  by  the  judge.' 

I  have  only  to  add  to  these  suggestions,  that  I  think 
a  special  court  should  be  created  at  Dublin,  similar  to 
the  court  erected  by  the  Encumbered  Estates  Act,  and 
that  erected  by  the  Irish  Church  Act. 

This  letter  was  published  early  in  1869.  Later  in 
the  year,  a  pamphlet  has  appeared,  written  by  Mr. 
Gerald  Fitzgibbon,  a  Master  in  Chancery,  a  man  of 
great  ability,  well  acquainted  with  the  law,  and  sin- 
cerely desirous  to  find  a  solution  which  may  prove 
beneficial  as  well  to  landlord  as  to  tenant,  and  be  pro- 
ductive of  peace  to  Ireland. 

His  suggestions  are  very  remarkable ;  his  experience 
and  his  suggestions  may  be  summed  up  as  follows  ;  — 

He  states  that  the  Court  of  Chancery  often  takes 
into  its  charge  an  estate  in  land.  He  has  himself  had 
to  deal  with  about  four  hundred  estates,  occupied  by 
nearly  twenty  thousand  tenants.  When  one  of  these 
tenants  applies  to  the  Court  of  Chancery  to  allow  the 
receiver  to  supply  slates  and  timber  for  roofing  a  farm- 
house or  a  cow-house,  upon  an  undertaking  to  build  the 
walls  and  complete  the  structure  at  the  tenant's  own 
expense,  Mr.  Fitzgibbon,  as  representing  the  Court  of 
Chancer}^,  uniformly  complies  with  it.  I  may  remark 
that  I  believe  every  just  and  liberal  landlord  does  the 
same.  Mr.  Fitzgibbon  likewise  complies  with  applica- 
tions from  the  tenant  for  assistance  to  drain  or  other- 
wise improve  the  farm. 

I  believe  that  most  landlords  would  comply  with 
similar  applications. 

But  as  the  distrust  of  the  tenants  is  so  wide-spread 
as  to  be  almost  universal,  Mr.  Fitzgibbon  would  enforce  . 
the  duties  of  landlords  in  the  following  manner :  — 


154  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

Pass  an  Act  by  which  every  tenant  in  the  country, 
great  and  small,  having  a  term  of  less  than  seven  years 
in  his  land,  shall  be  entitled  to  transmit  to  some  public 
functionary  a  written  notice  that  he  desires  to  improve 
his  farm,  and  undertakes,  within  three  years,  to  add 
some  substantial  and  specific  amount  to  the  present 
yearly  value.  If  his  proposal  is  approved,  and  he  ful- 
fils what  he  has  undertaken,  let  him  have  a  grant  at 
the  old  rent,  in  proportion  to  the  addition  he  has  made 
to  the  permanent  value  of  his  farm.  '  Let  an  addition 
of  twenty-five  per  cent  entitle  him  to  thirty  years. 
Give  him  sixty  years  if  he  adds  fifty  per  cent,  ninety 
years  if  he  adds  seventy-five  per  cent,  and  so  on.' 

Mr.  Fitzgibbon  deserves  great  credit  for  this  pro- 
posal, intended  to  reconcile  equity  with  popular  de- 
mands, and  encourage  industry  by  conferring  property 
upon  honest  exertion.  Yet  I  cannot  but  think  there  is 
some  danger  in  the  process  by  which  the  tenant  is  to  be 
enabled  to  oust  the  proprietor,  and  become  the  owner 
of  the  fee.  Lord  Portsmouth  speaks  of  his  grants  of 
leases  for  thirty-one  years,  but  not  at  the  same  rent  as 
the  leases  of  his  progenitors.  Neither  would  it  be  easy 
to  prove  the  exact  twenty-five  or  fifty  per  cent  which, 
with  lawyer-like  precision,  Mr.  Fitzgibbon  requires  as 
a  pre-existent  condition.  It  seems  to  me,  therefore, 
that  if  my  scheme  is  somewhat  too  vague  and  too 
rough,  Mr.  Fitzgibbon's  plan  is  too  positive  and  too 
minutely  guarded ;  that  it  holds  out  hopes  which  would 
not  be  realized,  and  would  hardly  stand  the  test  which 
he  himself  proposes  of  being  fit  for  adoption  in  Eng- 
land and  in  Scotland. 

Still  I  cannot  doubt  that  in  this  direction  lies  the  solu- 
tion of  the  land  difficulty  of  Ireland,  and  that  we  want 
only  the  combination  of  a  great  lawyer  with  a  great 


IMPROVEMENT  OF  IRELAND.         155 

statesman  to  arrive  at  a  peaceable  and  liappy  termina- 
tion of  this  perilous  and  impassioned  controversy. 

To  sum  up  this  question  of  Irish  grievances,  let  us 
reflect  that,  in  1829,  the  Roman  Catholics  of  Ireland,  as 
of  England,  were  made  competent  to  hold  offices  in  the 
political  government  of  the  country  and  in  courts  of 
law,  excepting  onl}-  the  offices  of  Lord  Lieutenant  and 
Lord  Chancellor  of  Ireland.  This  last  exception  has 
since  been  repealed. 

That,  in  1833,  the  Church  of  Ireland  was  freed  from 
many  abuses,  and  that  church  cess  (the  church-rate  of 
England)  was  totally  abolished. 

That  about  the  same  time  '  Schools  for  all '  were 
established  by  Lord  Derby,  then  Mr.  Stanley,  for  the 
purpose  of  improving  and  extending  National  Educa- 
tion. 

That,  in  1869,  the  Protestant  Church  of  Ireland  was 
disestablished  and  disendowed. 

That,  by  Acts  passed  in  1839  and  subsequent  years, 
the  paupers  of  Ireland  obtained  relief,  furnished  from 
rates. 

That,  by  Acts  relating  to  the  Poor-law  of  England, 
a  short  industrial  residence  in  England  enables  an  Irish 
workman  to  obtain  all  the  advantages  in  the  labor  mar- 
ket of  English  manufacturing  towns  which  an  English 
workman  enjoys. 

That,  in  1838,  the  chief  evil  of  the  tithe  system  was 
remedied  by  converting  tithe  into  rent-charge,  payable 
by  the  landlord. 

Tlie  consequences  of  these  and  various  other  Acts 
have  been  — 

That  there  is  now  complete  civil,  political,  and  re- 
ligious equality  in  Ireland  between  Protestants  and 
Catholics. 


156  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

That  the  rent  of  the  landlord,  the  capital  of  the 
farmer,  and  the  wages  of  the  agricultural  laborer,  have 
all,  since  1829,  greatly  increased. 

That  the  commerce  of  Ireland  and  the  revenue  from 
the  custom-house  have  been  considerably  augmented. 

That,  between  1832  and  1868,  agrarian  crimes  were 
much  diminished. 

That  the  disorders  which  prevailed  from  1792  to 
1838,  arising  from  the  collection  of  tithe,  have  totally 
ceased. 

That  the  evils  arising  from  the  deeply  mortgaged  con- 
dition of  many  landed  estates  have  been,  by  the  operation 
of  the  Encumbered  Estates  Act,  greatly  diminished,  and 
landed  property  to  the  amount  of  thirty  millions  has 
been  sold  to  solvent  purchasers. 

That  the  appointment  of  judges  without  reference  t6 
religious  creed,  and  the  selection  of*  juries  fairly  chosen 
from  Protestant  and  Roman  Catholic  qualified  persons, 
has  removed  all  just  cause  of  complaint  against  the  ad- 
ministration of  justice. 

Speaking  in  the  House  of  Commons,  in  1839,  I  said 
that  it  would  still  require  forty  years  to  remove  the  evils 
of  long  standing  which  afflicted  Ireland. 

Thirty  years  have  since  passed,  and  great  progress 
has  been  made. 

The  question  is  now,  —  shall  we  continue  that  prog- 
ress on  the  principles  of  justice  and  equality,  or  shall  we 
adopt  the  scheme  of  Irish  independence  recommended 
by  the  Fenian  partisans  ? 

It  is  as  clear  that  Dublin  and  Cork  must  belong  to 
the  United  Kingdom  of  England  and  Ireland,  as  that 
Lyons  and  Toulon  must  belong  to  France,  and  Rich- 
mond and  New  Orleans  to  the  United  States. 

The  plain  question,  then,  is,  —  are  the  Irish  agitators 


LAND  TENURE  IN  IRELAND.  157 

prepared  for  civil  war,  "with  all  its  horrors  and  all  its 
results  ? 

Supposing  the  wishes  of  Ireland  to  be  represented 
fairly  by  the  monster  meetings  on  tenant-right  and  on 
the  grant  of  an  amnesty  for  the  convicted  Fenians,  the 
wishes  and  the  wants  of  Ireland  must  be  carefully  sepa- 
rated. . 

It  is  the  right  of  a  people  to  represent  its  grievances. 
It  is  the  business  of  a  statesman  to  devise  remedies. 

The  wants  of  Ireland  are  real,  and  must  be  supplied. 
Her  wishes  are  transitory  and  intemperate ;  they  must 
be  filtered  till  all  impure  and  noxious  matter  is  cleared 
away,  and  nothing  left  but  what  is  pure  and  wholesome. 
Then,  indeed,  we  shall  have,  not  only  Hibernia  Pacata^ 
hut  Hibernia  Felix, 

Some  of  the  most  fruitful  causes  of  the  misery  of 
small  and  poor  tenants  in  Ireland  have  disappeared. 
When  the  elective  franchise  was  conferred  upon  Roman 
Catholics,  landlords  gave  forty-shilling  freeholds  to  mul- 
titudes of  miserable  cottiers,  and  drove  them  by  thou- 
sands to  the  poll,  in  exchange  for  the  titles  and  offices 
they  obtained  for  themselves  at  the  Castle.  The  Act 
of  1829,  abolishing  the  forty-shilling  freehold  franchise, 
took  away  the  temptation  to  create  these  fictitious  ten- 
ures. Forty  years  have  elapsed  since  the  abolition  of 
the  forty-shilling  freeholds.  But  it  is  not  time  only 
which  has  been  at  work.  The  great  potato  famine,  the 
immense  emigration  which  ensued,  and  the  Encumbered 
Estates  Act,  have  cleared  many  estates  of  the  pauper 
tenantry. 

The  Government  -can  have  no  difficulty  in  obtain- 
ing valuable  suggestions  from  official  and  independent 
sources.  The  large  and  liberal  mind  of  the  Lord  Chan- 
cellor of  Ireland,  the  legal  knowledge  of  the  law-officers 


168  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

of  the  Crown,  the  long  experience  and  enlightened  sug- 
gestions of  Dr.  Hancock,  who  dispelled  the  fictions  of 
those  who  maintained  that  Ireland  was  declining,  may  all 
be  drawn  upon  by  the  Cabinet  in  framing  a  measure  upon 
Irish  land.  If  rightly  framed,  it  would  be  a  still  greater 
blessing  than  the  abolition  of  the  Irish  Church  ;  but  the 
course  proposed  by  the  'Spectator'  would  produce, 
instead  of  fertility,  desolation ;  instead  of  hatred,  con- 
tempt. Here  would  be  a  fine  result  of  statesmanship 
applied  to  Ireland  I 

But  worse  might  be  apprehended,  if  the  Ribbon 
societies  and  their  hired  assassins  are  to  dictate  our 
future  policy. 

In  what  !Mr.  Trench  calls  the  Ribbon  conspiracy 
against  his  life,  the  chairman  is  reported  to  have 
said :  — 

•Down  with  the  Church,  down  with  the  landlords, 
down  with  the  agents,  down  with  every  thing,  say  I, 
that  stands  in  the  way  of  our  own  green  land  coming 
back  to  us  again.' 

*  What  wonderful  grand  fun  we'll  have  fighting 
among  ourselves,  when  it  does  come  I '  said  a  thick-set, 
herculean  fellow  at  the  lower  end  of  the  table. 

'Well,  now,  I  often  thought  of  that,'  replied  his 
neighbor  in  a  whisper;  'it'll  be  bloody  work  then  in 
airnesi:,  as  sure  as  you  and  I  live  to  see  it ;  any  thing 
that  has  happen'd  up  to  this  will  be  only  a  joke  to  what 
will  happen  then.' 

'  And  what  matter  ?  '  cried  the  advocate  for  fighting ; 
♦sure  wouldn't  it  be  better  any  day  to  be  fighting 
among  friends  than  have  no  fighting  at  all,  and  be 
slaves  to  our  enemies  I '  ^ 

^  'Realities  of  Iri«h  Life/  p.  194. 


ENCUMBERED  ESTATES  ACT.  159 

The  Scotch  Highland  Celts  used  to  say  among  them- 
selves, in  their  own  cabins,  and  in  their  own  language, 
'  Turn  out  the  Saxon  and  take  in  the  dog.'  But  the 
Highlands  have  been  pacified  without  expelling  the 
descendants  of  Gillespie  Campbell,  of  Anglo-Norman 
origin,  ancestor  of  the  Duke  of  Argyll,  or  of  John  of 
Moravia,  ancestor  of  the  Duke  of  Atholl.  So  it  will 
be  with  Ireland,  if  we  use  patience  and  moderation. 

I  cannot  omit  here  some  details  upon  the  Encumbered 
Estates  Act. 

The  proceeding  was  commenced  in  1848 ;  it  was 
completed  in  the  following  year.  Sir  Robert  Peel  had 
proposed  in  the  House  of  Commons  a  scheme  for  a 
new  settlement  of  land  in  Ireland,  framed  apparently 
upon  the  settlement  of  Ulster  by  James  I.  The  plan 
appeared  to  the  Government  and  to  members  of  Parlia- 
ment generally  to  be  too  large  and  vague  to  be  practi- 
cable, and  it  was  consequently  laid  aside.  A  bill  was 
introduced  into  the  House  of  Lords  by  the  Lord  Chan- 
cellor, Lord  Cottenham.  Sir  John  Romilly,  who  had 
been  recently  appointed  Solicitor-General,  framed,  in 
conjunction  with  Mr.  Walter  Coulson,  a  series  of  clauses 
which  completely  altered  the  character  of  the  bill,  and 
tended  to  make  it  far  more  effective.  But  when  the 
bill  went  back  to  the  House  of  Lords,  Lord  Cottenham 
so  modified  the  clauses  as  to  preserve  to  the  first  encum- 
brancer a  power  to  nullify  the  whole  bill.  This  Act 
passed  in  August,  1848 ;,  it  is  the  11th  and  12th  of 
Victoria,  cap.  48,  and  is  entitled  '  An  Act  to  facilitate 
the  sale  of  Encumbered  Estates  in  Ireland.'  When  the 
session  was  over,  being  very  anxious  on  this  subject,  I 
went  over  to  Ireland  chiefly  for  the  purpose  of  inquir- 
ing into  the  probable  operation  of  this  Act.  Lord 
Clarendon,  who  was  then  Lord  Lieutenant,  requested 


160  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

the  Chancellor  of  Ireland  to  come  to  the  Vice-regal 
Lodge  to  confer  with  me.  He  told  me  that  the  Act 
would  probably  be  evaded,  and  I  gathered  from  him 
that,  in  his  opinion,  it  would  be  a  dead  letter.  When  I 
returned  to  England  I  sent  for  Sir  John  Romilly,  and 
instructed  him  to  prepare  a  new  Encumbered  Estates 
Bill  for  Ireland.  I  gave  him  full  liberty  to  prepare  it 
as  he  thought  desirable,  both  as  to  the  scheme  to  be 
adopted,  and  as  to  the  provisions  to  be  introduced  for 
working  it,  permitting,  at  his  request,  that  the  working 
of  the  Act  should  be  confided  to  a  new  court,  to  be 
constituted  for  that  purpose.  When  Sir  John  Romilly 
introduced  the  bill  in  the  House  of  Commons,  he  was 
complimented  very  highh^  by  Sir  Robert  Peel,  who  said 
he  was  not  one  of  those  lawyers  who  took  away  the 
key  of  knowledge,  and  prevented  others  from  entering 
in.  Lord  Cottenham  waived  his  scruples;  the  Act 
framed  by  Sir  John  Romilly  and  Mr.  Coulson  was  con- 
fided to  a  court  composed  of  very  able  men ;  and  its 
operation,  extending  over  vast  masses  of  property,  and 
changing  the  ownership  of  many  estates,  the  owners  of 
which  had  been  hopelessly  encumbered,  and  the  tenants 
without  means  of  improvement,  proved,  by  the  consent 
of  all  parties,  eminently  beneficial. 

The  authorship  of  so  large  and  useful  a  measure  has 
been  attributed  by  many  to  Sir  Robert  Peel,  and  by 
Lord  St.  Leonards  to  himself.  But  to  the  decision  of 
the  Government  overruling  the  technical  views  of  their 
own  Lord  Chancellor,  and  to  the  constructive  skill  of 
Lord  Romilly  and  Mr.  Coulson,  this  enactment  must 
finally  be  attributed.^  Pauperized  owners  of  Castle 
Rackrents  have  given  place  to  prosperous  tradesmen. 

1  See  Letter  of  Lord  Romilly  in  the  '  Times '  of  March  18, 


CRIME  IN  IRELAND.  161 

But  there  is  some  doubt  whether  the  new  owners, 
though  generally  more  faithful  sons  of  the  Church  of 
Rome,  are  kinder  landlords  than  the  heroes  of  Miss 
Edgeworth's  tale. 

I  have  only  further  to  say  on  this  head,  that  agrarian 
crimes  must  be  put  down  by  a  vigorous  hand.  Sir 
George  Grey,  when  Home  Secretary,  was  fully  alive  to 
his  duty  in  this  respect.  He  acknowledged  that  Gov- 
ernment was  bound  to  protect  the  life  of  the  subjec^, 
and  he  as  explicitly  discouraged  all  the  wild  notions 
regarding  property  which  then,  as  now,  were  afloat. 
The  measure  which  he  introduced  in  1847  was  salutary, 
though  severe. 

Its  effects  may  be  estimated  by  taking,  from  official 
returns,  the  number  of  agrarian  crimes  committed  re- 
spectively in  the  years  1844,  1845,  1861,  1865,  1866  :  — 

Agrarian  Outrages. 

'1844 889 

1845 799 

1861 198 

1865 162 

:1866 83 

I  only  hope  that  in  1870,  the  Home  Secretary  may 
take  as  high  a  tone  as  Sir  George  Grey,  and  introduce 
a  measure  as  efficient  in  repressing  agrarian  crime  and 
outrage  as  Sir  George  Grey  introduced  in  1847. 

The  present  Government,  soon  after  their  entrance 
into  office,  seeing  that  the  Fenian  treason  had  been 
defeated  by  the  promptitude  and  vigor  of  Lord  Kimber- 
ley  and  the  Duke  of  Abercorn,  very  naturally  supposed 
that  the  least  guilty  of  the  offenders  might  be  pardoned. 
But,  however  natural  and  however  merciful  this  conduct 
on  the  part  of  the  Government,  it  has  clearly  appeared 
that  the  measure  was  a  mistaken  one.     The  liberated 

11 


162  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

criminals  have  taken  for  granted  that  they  were  par- 
doned, not  in  the  hope  of  their  penitence,  but  as  an 
indemnity  for  past  offences,  and  an  encouragement  to 
fresh  treasons. 

The  motives  of  the  Executive  Government  were 
laudable,  but  I  am  glad  to  hear  that  this  mistake  will 
not  be  repeated. 

In  1839,  in  order  to  comply  with  a  wish  of  Lord  Nor- 
manby,  whose  experience  in  Ireland  made  him  conversant 
with  inteinal  government,  I  gave  up  the  Home  Depart- 
ment to  him,  and  accepted  the  Colonial  Office. 

I  soon  became  interested  in  Colonial  affairs.  It  seemed 
to  me  that  the  Imperial  Government  was  bound,  both  in 
honor  and  from  the  soundest  views  of  national  policy, 
to  protect,  foster,  and  defend  our  Colonies.  It  may  be 
a  matter  of  doubt  whether  or  no  to  build  up  a  Colonial 
Empire.  But  it  is  evident  that  if  Great  Britain  gives  up 
her  supremacy  from  a  niggardly  spirit  of  parsimony,  or 
from  a  craven  feeling  of  helplessness,  other  powers  will 
soon  look  upon  the  Empire,  not  with  the  regard  due  to 
an  equal,  as  she  once  was,  but  with  jealousy  of  the  height 
she  once  held,  without  the  fear  she  once  inspired.  To 
build  up  an  Empire  extending  over  every  sea,  swaying 
many  diverse  races,  and  combining  many  forms  of  relig- 
ion, requires  courage  and  capacity;  to  allow  such  an 
Empire  to  fall  to  pieces  is  a  task  which  may  be  per- 
formed by  the  poor  in  intellect,  the  pusillanimous  in 
conduct. 

When  I  came  into  the  Colonial  Office,  there  was  a 
question  regarding  certain  parties  who  were  desirous  of 
founding  in  New  Zealand  a  government  having  coercive 
criminal  jurisdiction.  But  I  pointed  out  to  them  that 
such  conduct  would  be  a  violation  of  their  duty  as  Brit- 
ish subjects.     The  peraons  alluded  to  consulted  Serjeant 


COLONIAL  POLICY.  163 

Wilde,  afterwards  Lord  Truro,  and  finding  that  I  was 
right  in  point  of  law,  desisted  from  their  project.  I 
told  them,  however,  that  they  might  be  assured  of  the 
protection  of  the  Crown,  and,  by  the  treaty  of  Waitangi, 
the  Queen  assumed  the  sovereignty  of  New  Zealand.  It 
was  not,  therefore,  by  chance,  or  without  incurring  obli- 
gations on  the  part  of  the  Crown,  that  New  Zealand  was 
added  to  the  British  dominions. 

I  gave  still  stronger  assurances  to  the  British  Prov- 
inces of  North  America,  pledging  to  them  the  word  of 
the  Queen,  that  so  long  as  they  desired  to  remain  her 
subjects  they  should  receive  the  support  of  the  Crown, 
and  be  defended  as  a  part  of  the  British  dominions. 

A  faint-hearted  Government  in  Great  Britain  may 
break  these  pledges,  and  depart  from  this  policy.  But 
from  the  day  when  they  do  so,  the  Decline  and  Fall  of 
the  British  Empire  may  be  dated. 

At  the  same  time,  I  do  not  think  the  relations  of  the 
Colonies  to  the  mother  country  can  be  kept  up  precisely 
in  their  present  form. 

There  is  uneasiness  growing  up  on  both  sides ;  the 
Colonies  doubting  as  to  the  protection  they  may  receive, 
and  Great  Britain  complaining  of  the  cost  of  the  naval 
and  military  expenses  incurred  in  defence  of  Colonial 
interests  whenever  they  are  in  danger. 

I  am  disposed  to  believe,  that  if  a  congress,  or  assem- 
bly representing  Great  Britain  and  her  dependencies, 
could  be  convoked  from  time  to  time,  to  sit  for  some 
months  in  the  autumn,  arrangements  reciprocally  bene- 
ficial might  be  made. 

I  mean,  that,  on  the  one  hand,  the  metropolitan  State 
might  promise  protection  to  the  Colonies,  by  her  army 
and  navy,  against  any  foreign  or  barbarous  enemy ;  and, 
on  the  other  hand,  a  contribution  of  three  or  four  mil- 


164  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

lions  towards  our  army  and  navy  estimates  might  be 
granted  by  the  Colonial  Parliaments,  and  an  engagement 
taken  not  to  charge  more  than  a  certain  percentage,  say 
ten  per  cent  ad  valorem^  on  British  produce  and  manu- 
factures ;  or  they  might  propose,  as  New  Zealand  has 
lately  done,  to  ask  for  Imperial  j^id  when  absolutely 
required,  and  propose  to  defray  the  expense  of  the  aid 
afforded,  and  not  to  interfere  with  the  discretion  of  the 
British  commanders  by  sea  and  land.  In  such  case,  as 
we  have  a  Governor-General  in  India,  and  a  Governor- 
General  of  British  North  America,  so  we  might  have  a 
Governor-General  of  Australia  and  New  Zealand,  and  a 
Governor-General  of  Jamaica  and  of  the  West  Indian 
Islands. 

This  scheme  may  seem  impracticable  to  many.  But 
so  did  the  Reform  Act  of  1832 ;  so  did  the  total  repeal 
of  the  Corn-laws ;  so  did  the  abolition  of  the  Irish 
Church.  Great  changes  have  been  made  ;  great  changes 
are  impending ;  amid  these  changes,  there  is  no  greater 
benefit  to  mankind,  that  a  statesman  can  propose  to 
himself,  than  the  consolidation  of  the  British  Empire. 

In  my  eyes  it  would  be  a  sad  spectacle,  it  would  be 
a  spectacle  for  gods  and  men  to  weep  at,  to  see  this 
brilliant  Empire,  the  guiding-star  of  Freedom,  broken 
up,  —  to  behold  Nova  Scotia,  the  Cape  of  Good  Hope, 
Jamaica,  and  New  Zealand,  try  each  its  little  spasm  of 
independence,  while  France,  the  United  States,  and 
Russia  would  be  looking  on,  each  and  all  willing  to 
annex  one  or  more  of  the  fragments  to  the  nearest  por- 
tion of  their  own  dominions. 

The  difficulties,  in  detail,  of  such  an  arrangement 
might  be  great. 

Some  further  references  to  past  occurrences  may 
serve  to  explain  my  meaning. 


COLONIAL  POLICY.  165 

Mr.  Baldwin,  who  had  taken  a  prominent  part  in 
Canadian  politics,  came  to  England  while  Lord  Glenelg 
was  Secretary  of  State  for  the  Colonies,  and  by  his 
desire  discussed  with  me  the  question  of  responsible 
government.  I  raised  the  objection  that  a  responsible 
ministry  in  Canada  might  object  to  take  part  wdth  Eng- 
land in  a  foreign  war,  in  which  she  might  be  engaged. 

Mr.  Baldwin,  who  was  a  man  of  sense  and  ability, 
assured  me  that  the  Canadians  had  no  such  pretensions. 
They  wished  to  manage  their  own  local  affairs,  but  had 
no  desire  to  diminish  the  authority,  or  dim  the  lustre  of 
the  Crown  of  England  in  her  external  affairs. 

With  this  assurance  I  Avas  satisfied  ;  and  when  I  held 
the  seals  I  practically  acted  upon  it,  though  I  did  not 
concur  in  the  theory.  In  1854,  I  proposed  to  the  . 
House  of  Commons,  on  the  part  of  the  Government  of 
Lord  Aberdeen,  to  give  free  scope  to  the  legislature 
of  Canada  in  ecclesiastical  affairs,  and  I  have  seen  no 
reason  to  regret  this  polic3^ 

It  is  the  fashion  to  say  that  those  Colonies  which 
have  adopted  British  institutions,  whose  ministers  re- 
sign on  a  vote  of  want  of  confidence,  and  whose  laws 
are  framed  on  a  British  type,  are  virtually  independent, 
and  have  no  right  to  look  for  British  protection.  In 
my  opinion  nothing  can  be  meaner  in  spirit,  nothing 
less  wise  in  policy,  than  such  assertions. 

There  was  a  time  when  we  might  have  stood  alone 
as  the  United  Kingdom  of  England,  Scotland,  and 
Ireland.  That  time  has  passed.  We  conquered  and 
peopled  Canada,  we  took  possession  of  the  whole  of 
Australia,  Van  Diemen's  Land,  and  New  Zealand.  We 
have  annexed  India  to  the  Crown.  There  is  no  going 
back. 

»Tu  regere  imperio  populos,  Romane,  memento. 


106  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

For  my  part,  I  delight  in  observing  the  adoption  of 
our  free  institutions,  and  even  of  our  habits  and  man- 
ners, in  Colonies  at  a  distance  of  3,000  or  4,000  miles 
from  the  Palace  of  Westminster. 

During  my  tenure  of  the  Colonial  Office,  a  gentle- 
man attached  to  the  French  Government  called  upon 
me.  He  asked  me  how  much  of  Australia  was  claimed 
as  the  dominion  of  Great  Britain.  I  answered,  *  the 
whole,'  and  with  that  answer  he  went  away.  A  French 
traveller  of  great  quickness  and  power  of  observation 
has  lately  given  to  the  vrorld  his  impression  of  the 
friendly  feeling  of  our  Austrahan  fellow-subjects  to- 
wards the  mother  country.^ 

It  is  hardly  necessary  to  say,  that  when  the  majority 
in  any  of  our  dependencies  declare  by  their  representa- 
tives that  they  wish  to  separate  from  us,  no  attempt 
should  be  made  to  detain  them.  The  faults  committed 
by  George  Grenville,  Charles  Townshend,  and  Lord 
North  can  never  be  repeated. 

Of  course,  this  remark  does  not  apply  to  fortified 
places,  like  Gibraltar  and  Malta.  It  has,  however, 
been  too  much  the  fashion  for  writers  in  the  press,  and 
some  members  of  the  House  of  Commons,  to  overlook 
the  force  of  tradition,  and  the  obligations  of  treaties, 
and  to  assume  that  because  France  is  bigger  than 
Belgium,  Russia  bigger  than  Sweden,  therefore  Belgium 
nmst  be  annexed  to  France,  Sweden  to  Russia.  The 
story  of  Brasidas  might  teach  them  better. 

The  Minister  who  tries  to  weaken  the  attachment  of 
our  North  American  Provinces   to  Great  Britain  will 

*  See  *  Australie,  Voyage  autour  du  Monde,*  par  le  comte  de  Beau> 
voir:  Paris,  1869  —  a  very  interesting  and  amusing  work.  'Greater 
Britain,'  by  Sir  Charles  W.  Dilke,  is  a  very  able  work  ou  a  similar 
subject. 


DEFEAT  ON  FREE  TRADE.  167 

be  sure  to  rouse  the  generous  indignation  of  the  people 
of  England,  and  will  be  punished,  if  not  by  impeach- 
ment, at  all  events  by  eternal  infamy. 

I  pass  on  to  other  events. 

In  1840,  the  Turkish  Empire  was  threatened  with 
dissolution.  The  treaty  of  Unkiar  Skelessi  erected  a 
protectorate  of  Turkey  on  the  part  of  Russia ;  a  long 
course  of  intrigue,  and  the  boldness  of  Mehemet  Ali,  a 
man  of  great  genius  and  daring,  had  nearly  separated 
Egypt  and  Syria  from  the  Sultan's  sovereignty.  It 
became  a  question  whether  England  should  permit 
Russia  and  France  to  divide  the  Turkish  Empire  be- 
tween them.  The  wise  inaction  of  Lord  Palmerston 
gave  time  to  prepare  the  solution  of  a  great  crisis,  his 
vigor  shone  forth  at  the  decisive  moment,  and  after  the 
thunderbolt  had  fallen  at  Djune  and  at  Acre,  the  air 
was  cleared,  and  the  sky  was  again  serene. 

The  questions  relating  to  political  and  municipal 
franchises  were  of  so  much  difficulty,  and  excited  so 
much  political  heat,  that  the  Ministry  of  Lord  Mel- 
bourne abstained  for  some  years  from  attempting  to 
promote  those  principles  of  free  trade  which  had  given 
rise  to  the  honorable  exertions  of  Huskisson  and  Can- 
ning. The  attempt  of  Lord  Althorp  to  lower  the 
differential  duties  on  timber,  one  of  the  grossest  cases 
of  Colonial  protection,  was  received  so  coldly,  and  was 
so  effectually  thwarted  by  Sir  Robert  Peel,  that  the 
Government  could  not  hope  for  any  support  from  those 
Liberal  Tories  who  had  followed  Mr.  Huskisson  during 
the  Administration  of  Lord  Liverpool.  This  was  rather 
extraordinary,  for  Sir  Robert  Peel,  although  it  was  not 
generally  known,  had  been,  in  Lord  Liverpool's  Cabinet, 
a  warm  advocate  for  free  trade.  Indeed,  his  liberal 
opinions   upon  this  subject  probably  gave  rise  to  Mr^ 


108  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

Canning's  remark,  that  the  Cabinet  were  divided,  not 
by  a  straight,  but  by  a  serpentine  line. 

However,  in  1840,  the  questions  of  franchise  having 
been  nearly  all  decided,  a  committee  on  the  duties  of 
imports,  presided  over  by  Joseph  Hume,  and  informed 
•  l)y  the  accurate  knowledge  and  sound  judgment  of  Mr. 
Deacon  Hume,  revived  the  interest  upon  this  subject. 
The  question  for  the  Cabinet  to  decide  was,  in  reality, 
whether  they  would  lower  duties  of  a  protective  char- 
acter on  a  great  number  of  small  articles,  or  whether 
they  would  attack  the  giant  monopolies  of  sugar,  of 
timber,  and  of  corn.  The  latter  course,  the  most  gal- 
lant, though  perhaps  not  the  most  prudent,  was  pre- 
ferred; but,  at  the  same  time,  the  measures  proposed 
were  of  the  character  of  those  brought  forward  by 
Mr.  Huskisson,  viz.,  that  of  a  gradual  approach  to  free 
trade  rather  than  a  complete  repeal  of  protective  duties. 
In  this  spirit,  therefore,  the  Government  proposed  a 
reduction  of  the  differential  duties  on  sugar  to  128. ; 
of  the  protective  duties  on  timber  to  lOs. ;  and  with 
respect  to  corn,  a  fixed  duty  of  88. ;  to  be  relaxed  from 
time  to  time  by  Order  in  Council,  instead  of  the  sliding- 
scale,  which  had  been  the  favorite  scheme  of  Lord 
Liverpool. 

These  proposals,  however,  excited  quite  as  much  ani- 
mosity among  the  protected  interests  as  if  the  Govern- 
ment had  proposed  the  abolition  of  all  differential  duties 
on  sugar  and  timber,  and  a  total  repeal  of  the  Corn- 
laws.  The  landed  gentry  and  the  farmers  were  espe- 
cially indignant,  and  they  fondly  looked  to  Sir  Robert 
Peel  and  Sir  James  Graham  to  j)rotect  them  from 
changes  which  the  former  had  in  public  always  strongly 
opposed,  and  which  the  latter  had  denounced  as  de- 
.Btructive  to  the  position,  and  even  to  the  existence  of 


DEFEAT  OF  THE  WHIG  MINISTRY.  169 

the  land-owners  of  England.  In  spite  of  the  symptoms 
of  approaching  defeat,  I  brought  forward  the  question 
of  the  reduction  of  the  duties  on  sugar.  After  a  long 
debate,  my  motion  was  defeated  by  a  majority  of  thirty- 
six. 

This  decision  made  it  necessary  for  the  Cabinet  to 
consider  their  whole  position,  not  only  with  reference 
to  the  measures  they  had  announced,  but  also  to  their 
continuance  as  an  Administration.  It  was  obvious  that 
there  would  be  no  public  advantage  in  bringing  for- 
ward the  motion  for  a  fixed  duty  on  corn,  of  which 
notice  had  been  given.  There  was  no  chance  of  ob- 
taining a  majority  for  such  a  motion  ;  but  if  the  whole 
budget  of  the  year  was  to  be  thus  defeated,  it  was  plain 
that  the  only  alternative  which  remained  to  the  Cabi- 
net was  to  dissolve  or  to  resign.  This  question  was 
anxiousl}^  considered,  and  it  was  deemed  necessary  to 
obtain  some  insight  into  the  probable  effect  df  a  dissolu- 
tion before  resorting  to  such  a  measure.  Among  the 
letters  which  were  received  in  the  course  of  the  next 
few  days  by  members  of  the  Government,  was  one  from 
a  very  intelligent  gentleman  at  the  head  of  a  great 
banking  establishment  in  Lancashire,  to  the  effect  that 
in  order  to  impress  the  country  with  a  due  sense  of  the 
importance  of  a  change  from  protection  to  free  trade, 
it  was  the  duty  of  the  Government  to  submit  the  ques- 
tion to  the  test  of  a  general  election.  It  was  urged 
that,  whatever  might  be  the  verdict  as  to  majority  or 
minority  in  the  future  House  of  Commons,  the  great 
question  of  freedom  of  trade  could  not  fail  to  be  thor- 
oughly discussed,  and  especially  the  evils  of  incon- 
venient and  vexatious  restrictions  on  the  supply  of  food 
to  the  people  might  be  strongly  denounced.  Lord 
Grenville  had  said   of  the  Corn-laws,  in  a  memorable 


170  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

protest,  that  monopoly  is  the  parent  of  uncertainty,  of 
dearness,  and  of  scarcity.  This  great  truth,  and  the  in- 
justice of  such  a  monopoly  in  its  bearing  on  a  nation 
increasing  in  the  extent  of  its  manufactures,  the  ex- 
pansion of  its  commerce,  and  the  general  diffusion  of 
its  wealth,  could  not  escape  a  searching  criticism  and  an 
ultimate  condemnation. 

These  reasons  prevailed,  and  the  Cabinet,  after  sev- 
eral discussions,  decided  on  dissolution  in  preference 
to  immediate  resignation.  It  was  thought  best,  how- 
ever, for  the  sake  of  the  convenient  dispatch  of  busi- 
ness, and  of  a  constitutional  regard  on  the  part  of  the 
Crown  towards  the  House  of  Commons,  to  defer  the 
announcement  of  this  resolution.  Sir  Robert  Peel  took 
advantage  of  the  delay,  as  he  had  a  perfect  right  to  do, 
to  bring  forward  a  direct  motion  declaring  a  want  of 
confidence,  and  this  motion,  after  a  long  debate,  was 
carried  in  a  full  House  by  a  majority  of  one.  When, 
however,  the  Ministry  announced,  as  they  on  their  side 
were  entitled  to  do,  that  in  so  divided  a  state  of  opinion 
the  Crown  would  appeal  to  the  people  for  a  decision, 
Sir  Robert  Peel  intimated  that  he  would  not  interpose 
any  obstacle  to  a  dissolution  ;  but  he  made  it  a  condi- 
tion that,  the  elections  over,  the  new  House  of  Com- 
mons should  be  at  once  assembled.  With  this  condition 
I  readily  complied. 

The  dissolution  took  place.  The  Ministry  laid  be- 
fore the  country  for  decision  the  question  of  Protection 
or  Free  Trade.  In  the  month  of  August  the  House 
of  Commons  met,  and  decided  by  a  majority  of  ninety- 
one  that  the  existing  Ministers  had  not  their  confidence. 
Protection  had  been  the  bone  of  contention  during  the 
elections,  and  after  the  division  of  the  Tory  party  looked 
forward,  with  sanguine  hope,  to  the  perpetuity  of  the 


MINISTRY  OF   SIR  ROBERT   PEEL.  ITl 

Corn-laws,  and  the  eternal  institution  of  a  sliding-scale 
on  tlie  admission  of  foreign  corn.  Sir  Robert  Peel, 
however,  skilfully  avoided  this  issue  ;  and  while  he 
pledged  his  supporters  to  an  entire  want  of  confidence 
in  the  Liberal  Ministry,  he  left  himself  full  latitude  as 
to  the  measures  which  a  future  Ministry  might  think 
fit  to  adopt. 

After  the  vote  and  the  address,  the  Ministers  at  once 
resigned,  and  on  September  3  a  new  Ministry,  under 
Sir  Kobert  Peel,  was  inaugurated. 

Little  was  said,  and  less  was  done,  in  the  remainder 
of  the  session  of  1841. 

In  1842,  a  new  policy,  both  financial  and  commercial, 
was  inaugurated.  Much  was  done  in  the  direction  of 
free  trade,  but  the  dangerous  topics  of  corn,  sugar,  and 
timber  were  tenderly  touched  or  skilfully  evaded. 

Before  the  Parliament  expired  the  Corn-laws  were 
totally  repealed,  and  the  differential  duties  on  sugar  en- 
tirely abolished.  But  the  Income-tax  remained,  and 
still  remains,  as  the  positive  result  of  the  Tory  triumph 
in  1841. 

In  reviewing  these  proceedings,  it  may  be  thought 
that  Lord  Melbourne's  Government  showed  great  rash- 
ness when  they  proposed  to  touch  the  great  monopolies 
of  sugar,  of  timber,  and  of  corn.  Each  of  these  monop- 
olies was  intrenched  behind  fortifications  which  were  at 
that  time  impregnable.  The  West  India  interest  was 
wealthy  and  commercial,  possessing  great  influence  at 
Liverpool  and  Glasgow,  and  ramified,  through  many 
branches,  among  members  of  the  aristocracy  and  great 
mercantile  firms,  strongly  represented  in  both  Houses  of 
Parliament.  The  timber  monopoly,  though  eminently 
absurd,  and  defended  by  reasons  obviously  futile  and 
unsound,  was  identified  with  a  powerful  Colonial  inter- 


172  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

est,  and  had  been  covere'd  by  the  shield  of  the  Opposi- 
tion leader  when  Lord  Althorp  had  ventured  to  assail 
it.  Bat,  above  all,  the  great  monopoly  of  bread  was 
identified,  in  the  opinion  of  a  great  portion  of  the  Lords 
and  Commons,  with  the  station,  the  dignity,  and  even 
the  very  existence  of  what  is  called  '  the  landed  inter- 
est' of  England.  It  had  been  said  by  Lord  Boling- 
broke,  more  than  a  century  before,  that  while  the 
Whigs  might  have  occasional  tenure  of  power,  the 
Tories,  resting  upon  the  solid  foundations  of  Church 
and  land,  were  destined  to  hold  the  permanent  govern- 
ment of  the  country.  Burke,  with  the  same  opinion, 
though  not  with  the  same  inclinations,  had  affirmed,  in 
a  letter  to  Fox,  that  the  Whigs  had  never  attained 
power  but  by  a  skilful  use  of  opportunities.  This  doc- 
trine, as  to  the  solidity  and  the  permanence  of  Tory 
power,  was  held  by  a  numerous  body  of  peers  and 
country  gentlemen,  who  cared  nothing  for  the  writings 
of  Bolingbroke  or  Burke.  Sir  Robert  Peel,  therefore, 
showed  much  caution  when,  making  a  slight  change  in 
the  Corn-laws,  he  left  the  great  monopolies  of  sugar, 
timber,  and  corn  practically  untouched.  He  probably 
thought  that  to  others,  and  not  to  him,  would  be  left 
the  enterprise  of  destroying  the  dragon  whose  ravages 
had  spread  famine  among  the  people. 

1  have  no  need,  and  no  inclination,  to  follow  in  detail 
the  Administration  of  Sir  Robert  Peel.  It  was  power- 
ful, popular,  and  successful.  Yet  he  did  not  hesitate, 
when  he  thouglit  it  essential  for  the  public  good,  to  risk 
the  fate  of  his  Ministry  on  behalf  of  an  unpopular  meas- 
ure. He  felt  deeply  that  Ireland  was  his  difficulty ;  he 
had  abandoned,  in  1829,  those  doctrines  of  Protestant 
ascendency  and  those  exclusive  laws  which  maintain  a 
Protestant  garrison  in  Ireland  —  doctrines  and  laws  to 


/  OF  THE 


I    UN/ 


or 


y 


MINISTRY  OF  SIR  ROBERT  PEEL.  173 

which  he  had  clung  with  so  much  tenacity  in  the  earlier 
part  of  his  political  career.  But  he  had  not  gained  the 
confidence  of  the  Roman  Catholics  of  Ireland,  and  they 
obstinately  refused  favors  at  his  hands  which  they  would 
have  been  willing  to  accept  from  a  Liberal  Administra- 
tion. To  a  man  of  the  large  mind  of  Sir  Robert  Peel, 
tlie  alienation  of  Irish  opinion  and  affection  must  have 
appeared  a  serious  evil  in  the  presence  of  domestic 
embarrassments  and  foreign  complications.  In  this 
perplexity,  he  brought  forward,  as  Prime  Minister,  a 
measure  for  a  generous  and  sufficient  endowment  of 
the  College  of  Maynooth.  Much  public  discontent  was 
excited  among  the  fanatical  parts  of  the  Protestant 
population  of  England.  I  received  several  letters,  as- 
suring me  that  the  confidence  of  my  constituents  of  the 
city  of  London  would  be  withdrawn  from  me  if  I  con- 
tinued to  give  my  support  to  the  measure  of  the  Min- 
istry. Yet  I  was  persuaded  then,  as  I  am  still  persuaded, 
that  the  measure  was  one  of  broad  and  wise  policy, 
tending  to  conciliate  the  Catholics  of  Ireland,  and  to 
prove  to  that  portion  of  the  Queen's  subjects  that  th^ir 
interests  and  their  welfare  were  not  indifferent  to  the 
statesmen  and  the  people  of  England.  It  was  thus  con- 
sidered by  the  Catholic  body  in  general ;  and  at  the  last 
reading  of  the  bill  in  the  House  of  Commons  it  was  thus 
hailed  by  Lord  Arundel,  as  the  organ  of  his  communion, 
and  of  the  large  numbers  associated  with  him  by  faith, 
though  not  by  race. 

It  was  supposed  at  the  time,  openly  stated  by  me,  and 
as  openly  accepted  by  Sir  Robert  Inglis,  that  this  measure 
was  preparatory  to  one  for  the  general  endowment  of 
the  Roman  Catholic  Church  in  Ireland.  Sir  Robert 
Peel,  in  a  private  conversation  at  Nuneham  a  few  years 
afterwards,   suggested  such  a  measure   as    fit  to    be 


174  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

adopted ;  but  when  Mr.  Sheil,  who  was  present,  urged 
that  Sir  Robert  himself  ought  to  be  the  Minister  to  pro- 
pose it,  he  declined  any  such  responsibility.  Nor  is  it 
likely  that,  had  he  returned  to  office,  he  would  have 
ventured  upon  a  course  so  repugnant  to  the  predilec- 
tions of  his  party,  so  distasteful  to  the  Low  Church  and 
Nonconformists  in  England,  and  to  the  Presbyterians 
of  Scotland.  Be  that  as  it  may,  the  Maynooth  Act  was 
a  work  of  wisdom  and  liberality,  and  must  always  be 
remembered  to  the  honor  of  the  Minister  who  proposed 
and  carried  it. 

T  now  pause  awhile  in  this  sketch  of  my  recollections, 
hoping  to  continue  it  at  a  later  day. 

In  the  mean  time,  I  add  some  observations  on  topics 
which  appear  to  me  of  public  interest. 

Belonging  to  the  Whig  party,  the  aim  of  that  party 
has  always  been  my  aim  — '  The  cause  of  civil  and 
religious  liberty  all  over  the  world.*  I  have  endeav- 
ored, in  the  words  of  Lord  Grey,  to  promote  that  cause 
without  endangering  the  prerogatives  of  the  Crown,  the 
privileges  of  the  two  Houses  of  Parliament,  or  the  rights 
and  liberties  of  the  people. 

According  to  my  view,  the  Tory  party  cared  little  for 
the  cause  of  civil  and  religious  liberty,  and  the  Radical 
party  were  not  solicitous  to  preserve  those  parts  of  the 
Constitution  which  did  not  suit  their  speculative  and 
theoretical  opinions. 

To  hold  a  middle  way,  to  observe  the  precept  of 
Daedalus  and  to  avoid  the  fate  of  Icarus,  is  at  all  times 
difficult,  and,  in  certain  conjunctures,  perilous. 

Happily,  from  1830  to  1866,  the  Whigs  and  the 
Liberal  Tories,  who,  like  Lord  Palmerston  and  Mr. 
Charles  Grant,  followed  Mr.  Canning,  or  who,  like  the 
Duke  of  Newcastle,  Mr.  Sidney  Herbert,  and  Mr.  Glad- 


EEPEAL  OF  NAVIGATION  ACT.  175 

•stone,. followed  Sir  Robert  Peel,  have  been  able  to  ac- 
complish great  changes ;  to  enlarge  the  limits  of  religious 
liberty ;  to  promote  the  cause  of  freedom  in  Italy  and 
Spain,  in  Belgium  and  Greece ;  to  break  the  fetters  of 
monopoly  and  restriction  which  bound  our  commerce ; 
and  to  emancipate  our  Colonies  from  the  ignorance  and 
errors  of  the  Home  Government,  without  endangering 
any  part  of  our  Constitution. 

The  effects  of  this  enlarged  and  liberal  policy  upon 
our  finances  and  our  trade  have  been  very  remarkable. 

Thus  to  take  only  a  few  of  the  later  changes. 

In  1857,  the  receipts  into  the  Exchequer  amounted  to 
72,334,000?. 

Since  that  time  the  amount  of  taxes  repealed,  com- 
pared with  taxes  imposed,  gives  a  balance  in  favor  of 
diminished  taxation  of  21,880,000?.  The  amount  of 
revenue  in  March  last  was  72,592,000?.,  thus  showing 
an  actual  increase  after  the  reduction. 

The  amount  of  the  exports  and  imports,  about  1853, 
was  268,000,000?. 

In  the  year  1868,  the  two  sums  reached  568,000,000?. 

In  the  year  1848,  the  Navigation  Law  was  repealed, 
and  Lord  Derby  and  others  predicted  the  total  ruin  of 
our  commercial  marine  as  the  consequence.  Mr.  Lind- 
say, who  believed  in  these  prophecies,  and  has  avowed 
his  conversion,  shall  tell  the  result :  — 


Vessels  registered.                 Tonnage. 
1841    ....    23,461    ....    2,935,399    .    . 
1867    ....    40,942    ....    7,277,098    .    . 

Men  employed. 
.    .     172,341 
.    .    346,606 

Of  British  and  Foreign  tonnage  in  1867 :  — 

British. 

Entered  inwards 11,197,685  .... 

Cleared  outwards      ....     11,172,205  .... 

Foreign. 
.    5,140,952 
.    5,245,090  i 

A  '  Log  of  my  Leisure  Hours,'  by  an  Old  Sailor,  vol.  iii.  p.  204. 


176      RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

These  figures  have  been  taken  from  the  Customs 
Returns. 

Not  only  have  these  changes  taken  place  without 
convulsion,  but  when,  in  1848,  all  Europe  was  shaken 
by  revolutions,  the  people  of  London  rose  on  the  10th 
of  April,  not  to  overthrow,  but  to  maintain  our  laws 
and  institutions. 

Among  the  most  interesting  speculations  upon  which 
an  Englishman  can  enter,  is  the  question  whether  the 
political  Constitution  under  which  we  live  is  likely  to 
endure.  Montesquieu  said  that  our  Constitution  would 
perish  whenever  the  legislative  power  should  become 
more  corrupt  than  the  executive.  He  was  thinking, 
probably,  of  the  danger  arising  from  bribes,  in  the  shape 
of  offices,  or  lottery-tickets,  or  even  in  the  grosser  form 
of  money,  given  by  an  incorruptible  Minister  to  a  cor- 
rupt majority  of  the  House  of  Commons.  But  this 
kind  of  corruption  had  already  diminished  in  the  days 
of  Walpole,  had  farther  abated  in  the  days  of  Pitt,  and 
in  our  time  has  almost  totally  disappeared.  Public 
opinion  has  stamped  it  out. 

Let  us  see,  then,  what  are  the  positive  advantages 
of  the  British  form  of  government,  and  what  are  the 
apparent  dangers  to  which  it  is  exposed. 

1.  There  is  complete  personal  liberty.  A  man  may 
think  what  he  pleases,  write  what  he  thinks,  publish 
what  he  writes.  Unless  he  commit  some  flagnint  offence 
against  the  laws,  and  be  convicted  of  that  offence,  he 
cannot  be  punished. 

2.  In  case  of  reasonable  suspicion  of  crime,  he  is 
entitled  to  have  his  case  examined  by  a  judge  of  integ- 
rity and  learning,  whose  opinion  of  his  guilt  must  be 
confirmed  by  a  jury  taken  from  among  tke  householders 
of  his  county. 


CONSTITUTION  OF  GREAT  BRITAIN.  177 

3.  If  a  majority  of  the  nation  are  dissatisfied  with 
the  administration  of  public  affairs,  their' representatives 
can  at  once  obtain  a  change  of  men  and  measures  by  a 
simple  declaration  of  want  of  confidence. 

This  last  advantage  is  one  not  enjoyed  by  the  United 
States  of  America.  When  a  President  has  lost  the  con- 
fidence of  his  countrymen,  and  of  Congress,  he  can 
only  be  removed  by  an  impeachment,  for  which  there 
may  be  no  sufficient  grounds,  or  by  the  expiry  of  his 
term  of  office,  which  may  be  in  three  months,  or  may 
not  occur  for  more  than  three  years. 

The  defects  of  the  English  Constitution  affect  chiefly 
the  electoral  constituents  as  a  body  which  chooses  the 
House  of  Commons,  and  the  Parliament  as  a  body 
empowered  to  make  laws.  The  electors  require  to  be 
restrained  from  bribery  and  excessive  expenses,  which 
affect  our  reputation,  and  poison  representation  at  its 
source.  The  House  of  Commons  must  be  compelled  by 
public  opinion  to  secure  purity  of  election. 

The  United  States,  having  Federal  Legislatures  in- 
trusted with  the  business  of  making  laws,  are  not  sub- 
ject to  our  defects. 

In  the  House  of  Commons  bills  are  postponed,  year 
after  year,  for  want  of  time.  The  financial  periods 
are  so  arranged  that  measures  of  general  legislation 
are,  except  in  rare  cases,  begun  in  that  House  early  in 
February,  and  finished  late  in  July.  This  is  owing 
partly  to  the  necessity  of  arranging  expenditure  and 
taxes  before  the  end  of  March,  and  partly  to  the  habit, 
which  has  increased,  is  increasing,  and  ought  to  be 
diminished,  of  making  very  long  speeches.  An  old 
woman  might  now  make  to  the  House  of  Commons 
the  prediction  which  an  old  woman  once  made  to 
Horace :  — 

12 


1T8      RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

Hunc  neque  dira  venena,  nee  hosticus  auferet  ensis, 
Nee  laterum  dolor,  aut  tusBis,  nee  tarda  podagra ; 
Garrulus  hunc  quando  consumet  cunque.^ 

But,  supposing  the  House  of  Commons  obstinately 
persists  in  calling  for  the  budget  in  March,  instead  of 
postponing  it  till  June,  and  members  obstinately  persist 
in  talking  through  April,  May,  and  June,  then,  not 
indeed  the  measures  on  which  the  fate  of  the  country 
or  of  the  Ministry  depend,  but  measures  of  ordinary 
improvement  relating  to  courts  of  justice,  to  the  univer- 
sities, to  the  public  health,  to  education,  to  the  Church, 
&c.,  &c.,  will  continue  to  be  sent  to  the  House  of  Lords 
in  the  last  half  of  July. 

A  body  eager  for  plans  of  reform  might,  at  that 
season,  consider  rapidly  the  wishes  of  the  House  of 
Commons.  But  the  demand  is  hardly  reasonable,  and 
by  an  ancient  and  conservative  Senate  the  task  will 
probably  be  postponed  till  the  next  year. 

There  is,  however,  a  defect  in  the  personal  composi- 
tion of  the  House  of  Lords,  which  does  not  belong  to 
its  original  constitution. 

Since  1784,  as  we  have  seen,  Pitt  and  his  successors 
have  so  filled  the  House  of  Lords  with  Tory  country 
gentlemen,  that  it  has  become  a  party  body.  Happily 
the  good  sense  of  the  sons  has  supplied  the  deficiency 
of  the  fathers,  and  there  can  be  little  doubt  that,  while 
a  Liberal  Minister  has  the  power  of  redressing  the 
balance  which  Pitt  so  greatly  disturbed,  the  House  of 
Lords  will  be  afraid  of  bringing  down  upon  their  heads 
a  weight  which  might  crush  them  altogether.  If, 
therefore,  a  measure  like  the  University  Tests  Bill  is 
carried  through  the  House  of  Commons  by  the  Gov- 


1  Hor.  *Sat/Lix.  81. 


HOUSE  OF  LORDS.  179 

ernment,  the  Lords  will  not  repeat  their  foolish  vote  of 
last  session.!  On  the  other  hand,  the  House  of  Com- 
mons must  not  repeat  the  course  which  induced  the 
House  of  Lords,  in  their  just  resentment,  to  throw  out 
the  Scotch  Education  Bill. 

Some  persons  have  endeavored  to  bring  on  at  once 
such  a  collision  as  would  either  destroy  the  House  of 
Lords,  or  induce  the  nation  to  rally  round  them  as  an 
integral  part  of  the  Constitution. 

I  beg  to  submit  to  such  persons  the  two  following 
remarks :  — 

The  first  is  that,  if  the  hereditary  privileges  of  the 
peers  are  overthrown,  the  hereditary  prerogative  of  the 
Sovereign  will  also  be  sacrificed.  '  Do  not,'  said  an 
accomplished  orator  in  the  House  of  Commons,  many 
years  ago,  '  hang  the  Crown  on  the  peg  of  an  excep- 
tion.' The  particular  application  was  mistaken,  but 
the  observation  has  truth  to  recommend  it.  The  Sover- 
eign does  not  inherit  wisdom  any  more  than  the  Duke 
of  Norfolk. 

The  best  Government  consists  in  the  union  of  liberty 
and  order:  we  are  at  present  in  full  possession  of 
liberty,  but  order  is  sometimes  in  danger.  Now,  for 
the  purpose  of  order,  it  is  material  that  there  should 
exist  in  the  great  bodies  of  the  State  the  power  which 
is  called  authority.  Nothing  more  excites  reverence 
than  ancient  prescriptive  privilege  ;  nothing  more  moves 
the  imagination  than  ancient  lineage  combined  with 
recent  achievement.  Thus,  to  see  in  one  assembly  the 
descendants  of  the  Talbots  who  fought  for  their  country 
in  the  fourteenth  century,  with  the  Napier  who  so 
lately  triumphed  in  Abyssinia,  the  heir  of  Marlborough, 

1  They  did  not  do  so. 


180  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

who  won  the  battle  of  Blenheim,  and  of  Wellmgton, 
the  victor  at  Waterloo,  and  of  Nelson,  who  fell  at  Traf- 
algar, of  Cecil,  the  wise  counsellor  of  Elizabeth,  and  of 
Grey,  the  upright  Minister  of  William  IV.,  with  the 
representatives  of  Mansfield,  and  of  Camden,  of  Hard- 
wicke,  and  of  Somers,  gives  dignity  and  weight  to  the 
House  of  Peers. 

It  is  true  that  every  editor  of  a  magazine  can  furnish 
at  a  few  days'  notice  a  better  Senate  than  the  British 
House  of  Lords. 

Happily  the  people  of  England  give  little  attention 
to  those  fanciful  schemes.  The  nobility  of  England 
are  not,  like  the  French  nobility  before  the  Revolution, 
slavish  sycophants  of  a  court.  They  are  known  in 
their  country  houses  as  the  free  landlords  of  a  free 
tenantry,  promoting  social  good-will  by  a  becoming 
hospitality.  They  are  known  in  courts  of  justice  as 
foremen  of  grand  juries  and  magistrates  at  quarter- 
sessions.  They  share  in  national  sports,  and  their  wives 
and  daughters  visit  the  widows  and  the  fatherless  in 
their  affliction. 

Lastly,  when  a  great  question  arises,  which  requires 
a  display  of  more  than  ordinary  knowledge  of  history, 
more  accurate  learning,  more  constitutional  lore,  and 
more  practical  wisdom  than  is  to  be  found  in  the  usual 
debates  of  Parliament,  I  know  not  where 

The  general  debate, 
The  popular  harangue,  the  tart  reply, 
The  logic,  and  the  wisdom,  and  the  wit 

are  to  be  found  in  greater  perfection  than  among  the 
prelates  on  the  Episcopal  bench,  the  peers  of  three 
centuries  of  nobility,  t^d  the  recent  occupants  of  the 
Woolsack. 


DANGER  OF  REVOLUTION.  181 

Let  me  add  what  is,  perhaps,  the  most  important 
security  of  all  —  the  prospect  of  any  great  democratic 
changes  would  shake  public  credit,  and  bring  the  nation 
to  its  senses  —  so  that  I  cannot  say  I  feel  any  alarm 
lest  events  should  lead  to  the  abolition  of  the  House  of 
Lords  —  involving,  as  no  doubt  it  would,  the  fall  of  the 
Monarchy. 

Lastly,  to  speak  of  my  own  work,  I  can  only  rejoice 
that  I  have  been  allowed  to  have  my  share  in  the  task 
accomplished  in  the  half-century  which  has  elapsed 
from  1819  to  1869.  My  capacity,  I  always  felt,  was 
very  inferior  to  that  of  the  men  who  have  attained  in 
past  times  the  foremost  place  in  our  Parliament,  and  in 
the  councils  of  our  Sovereign.  I  have  committed  many 
errors,  some  of  them  very  gross  blunders.  But  the  gen- 
erous people  of  England  are  always  forbearing  and  for- 
giving to  those  statesmen  who  have  the  good  of  their 
country  at  heart ;  like  my  betters,  I  have  been  misrep- 
resented and  slandered  by  those  who  know  nothing  of 
me ;  but  I  have  been  more  than  compensated  by  the 
confidence  and  the  friendship  of  the  best  men  of  my 
own  political  connection,  and  by  the  regard  and  favor- 
able interpretation  of  my  motives,  which  I  have  heard 
expressed  by  my  generous  opponents,  from  the  days  of 
Lord  Castlereagh  to  these  of  Mr.  Disraeli. 

In  political,  as  in  other  pursuits,  men  engage  from 
various  motives  ;  and  as  in  the  Church  and  at  the  Bar, 
in  the  Army  and  in  the  Navy,  some  are  to  be  found  who 
do  no  credit  to  the  gown  or  to  the  uniform,  so  in  the 
State.  But,  so  far  as  I  have  been  able  to  observe,  I  can 
sincerely  say  that  I  believe  the  public  men  of  Great 
Britain,  whatever  diversity  there  may  be  in  their  views, 
have  sincerely  and  honestly  at  heart  the  welfare  of  that 
great  and  free  nation  to  which  they  belong.  R. 

September  23,  1869. 


182  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

Postscript.  —  While  these  sheets  have  been  going 
through  the  press,  the  news  of  the  death  of  Lord  Derby 
has  afflicted  his  country,  which  saw  in  him  a  man,  noble 
by  character  as  well  as  by  rank,  always  ready  to  sacri- 
fice office  for  the  sake  of  maintaining  his  opinions,  and 
forming  those  opinions,  if  with  the  fallibility  of  human 
judgment,  yet  with  an  integrity  which  must  in  all 
future  times  command  respect.  R. 

November  23.  1869. 


LORD  PALMERSTON'S  POLICY.  183 


CHAPTER  11. 

POLICY  OF  LORD   PALMERSTON  IN  THE  EAST. 

I  WILL  now  refer  to  some  occurrences  which  took  place 
previously  to  1841,  when  the  Whig  Government  were 
defeated  by  the  results  of  the  general  election. 

The  year  1840  saw  the  climax  of  Lord  Palmerston's 
diplomatic  ability  and  success  as  a  statesman.  For  a 
long  time  he  had  observed  a  total  silence  with  respect 
to  his  views  on  the  complications  of  the  East.  At 
length  he  brought  before  the  Cabinet  a  proposal,  con- 
ceived with  great  foresight,  and  fully  justified  by  the 
position  of  England.  He  asked  from  the  Cabinet  that 
he  should  be  intrusted  with  power  to  conclude  a  treaty 
with  Austria,  Prussia,  and  Russia  for  the  protection  of 
the  Turkish  Empire,  and  resistance  to  the  aggressive 
attempts  of  the  Pacha  of  Egypt,  supported  by  France, 
to  destroy  the  integrity  of  the  Turkish  territory,  by 
depriving  the  Sultan  of  his  sovereignty  over  Egypt. 

I  concurred  entirely  in  his  plan,  which  seemed  to  me 
to  afford  the  only  alternative  to  abandonment  of  the 
Turkish  Empire  as  a  spoil  to  be  scrambled  for  between 
Russia  and  France.  On  the  one  side  was  the  treaty  of 
Unkier-Skelessi,  throwing  its  shield  over  Constantinople 
and  the  Dardanelles ;  on  the  other  side  were  the  in- 
trigues of  France  and  her  Minister,  M.  Thiers,  skilfully 
directed  to  the  old  French  object,  pursued  by  the  first 
Napoleon  before  the  Peace  of  Amiens,  and  carried  on 


184  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

during  the  existence  of  that  peace,  of  giving  to  France 
the  dominion  of  Egypt. 

But,  although  I  fully  concurred  in  the  policy  of  Lord 
Palmerston,  I  saw  that  there  was  danger  in  forcing  the 
Cabinet  to  an  immediate  decision.  The  Eastern  ques- 
tion had  been  a  topic  of  conversation  for  months  among 
political  parties.  M.  Guizot  was  the  able  and  intelligent 
Ambassador  of  France  in  England.  By  his  dispatches 
it  was  known  to  the  French  Government  that  Lord 
Holland  and  Lord  Clarendon  were  strong  advocates  for 
the  French  Alliance,  which  they  wished  to  be  continued 
and  strengthened.  It  was  doubtful  how  many  members 
of  the  Cabinet  might  espouse  these  views.  I  therefore 
urged  delay,  and  obtained  the  consent  of  Lord  Palmer- 
ston to  a  postponement  of  the  decision  of  this  mighty 
question  to  the  Tuesday  following.  After  the  Cabinet, 
I  went  down  to  Buckhurst,  a  country  house  which  I 
had  hired,  on  the  borders  of  Windsor  Park.  There,  on 
the  following  morning,  I  received  a  messenger  from 
Lord  Palmerston,  with  a  box  containing  a  long  letter  in 
support  of  his  views.  I  at  once  answered  his  letter, 
telling  him  that  I  was  fully  convinced  of  the  soundness 
of  the  policy  he  had  explained  to  the  Cabinet,  but  add- 
ing that  I  thought  a  short  time  was  required  to  rally 
and  to  reconcile  the  opinions  of  our  colleagues. 

On  the  Monday  morning  I  went  to  London,  and  had 
no  sooner  reached  my  office  than  Lord  Melbourne  came 
to  me  and  consulted  me  on  the  impending  decision.  I 
told  him  that  I  completely  embraced  the  opinions  of 
Lord  Palmerston,  but  that  I  thought  it  required  an 
effort  on  his  part  to  secure  unanimity  in  the  Cabinet.  I 
told  him  that  I  thought  he  ought  to  tell  Lord  Holland 
that  he  was  looked  upon  by  Whig  politicians  as  the  rep- 
resentative of  Mr.  Fox,  and  that  his  resignation  might 


LORD  PALMERSTON'S  POLICY.  185 

break  up  the  Ministry  or  even  dissolve  the  party.  Lord 
Melbourne  consented.  He  had  some  doubts  about  the 
policy,  but  said  he  thought  Lord  Palmerston  would 
resign  if  it  were  not  adopted.  The  result  of  the  meeting 
on  Tuesday  was  an  entire  agreement  in  the  Cabinet,  and 
the  signature  of  the  Quadruple  Treaty  a  few  days  after- 
wards. 

There  were,  however,  still  some  difficulties  to  be  over- 
come, both  Parliamentary  and  naval.  Lord  Minto,  as 
head  of  the  Admiralty,  informed  me  that  he  should 
require  an  additional  number  of  seamen,  and  asked  me 
whether  a  vote  of  credit  would  not  be  necessary.  I 
said  I  thought  not :  that  an  additional  force  of  seamen 
might  be  levied ;  and  if  the  policy  of  the  Government 
was  successful  the  defect  of  form  would  be  condoned. 
A  little  later,  during  the  recess.  Lord  Palmerston  repre- 
sented to  Lord  Melbourne  that  instructions  ought  at 
once  to  be  sent  to  the  Mediterranean,  directing  Admiral 
Stopford  to  attack  Acre.  Lord  Melbourne  wrote  to  me 
asking  my  opinion.  I  answered  that  I  thought  Admiral 
Stopford  would  attack  Acre  without  special  instructions, 
but  that  to  make  things  sure  instructions  such  as  Lord 
Palmerston  advised  ought  to  be  sent.  This  opinion  was 
sent  to  Lord  Minto,  who  warmly  concurred.  Acre  was 
taken.  A  powder-magazine,  which  an  Austrian  Arch- 
duke had  pointed  out  as  likely  to  explode,  exploded. 
Concurrently  with  this  event  the  famous  army  of  Ibra- 
him Pacha,  supposed  to  be  about  to  make  an  easy  con- 
quest of  Constantinople,  was  defeated  by  the  Turks. 
The  Turkish  army  passed  over  into  Egypt ;  Mehemet 
Ali  renounced  his  ambitious  plans;  Louis  Philippe, 
at  that  time  King  of  the  French,  renounced  those  of 
Napoleon  the  First,  and  the  peace  of  Europe  was 
assured. 


186      RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

When  Parliament  met  I  had  no  difficulty  in  obtaining 
their  pardon  for  our  victorious  career. 

In  the  course  of  these  transactions  I  had  occasion  to 
do  what  I  was  in  the  habit  of  frequently  doing,  —  I  con- 
sulted the  Duke  of  Wellington  upon  the  state  of  our 
affairs.  I  asked  him  whether  he  thought  there  was  any 
danger  of  an  attack  by  the  French  fleet  upon  Malta  or 
Gibraltar.  He  told  me  he  thought  our  position  was  a 
very  good  one  ;  that  he  only  regretted  that  we  had  not 
asked  the  French  to  be  parties  with  us  to  the  Quadruple 
Treaty.  He  did  not  apprehend  any  attack  by  a  hostile 
fleet  upon  Malta  or  Gibraltar ;  he  thought  the  French 
would  not  like  to  touch  a  British  garrison. 

Thus  the  policy  of  Lord  Falmerston,  adopted  by  the 
Whig  Cabinet,  maintained  the  honor  of  the  British  name, 
kept  Egypt  out  of  the  hands  of  France,  and  secured  the 
peace  of  Europe. 

Before  I  close  this  chapter  I  must  allude,  as  briefly 
as  I  can,  to  the  great  event  which  occurred  in  the  year 
1837 ;  namely,  the  death  of  King  William  the  Fourth, 
and  the  accession  of  Queen  Victoria.  William  the 
Fourth  had  made  a  memorable  concession  to  the  advice 
of  his  Ministers  and  the  wishes  of  his  people,  when,  upon 
hearing  the  views  and  explanations  of  Earl  Grey,  he 
gave  his  consent  and  approbation  to  the  Reform  Bill. 
He  took  an  unusual  and  ill-considered  step,  when,  upon 
the  demise  of  Lord  Spencer,  he  declared  bluntly  to  Lord 
Melbourne  that  he  had  no  further  occasion  for  his  ser- 
vices. It  has  since  been  explained  that  the  King's  mind 
was  alarmed  by  some  letters  of  Lord  Duncannon  on  the 
subject  of  the  Irish  Church,  and  that  lie  dreaded  the 
proposals  which  his  Ministei's  might  submit  to  him  on 
the  subject  of  that  Church.  But,  allowing  that  the 
alarm  was  natural,  the  King  would  have  acted  more  in 


ACCESSION  OF  QUEEN  VICTOEIA.  187 

conformity  with  prudence,  precedent,  and  constitutional 
usage,  and  with  greater  chance  of  success,  if  he  had 
allowed  his  Ministers  to  bring  forward  their  proposals, 
and  had  founded  his  opposition  on  the  objections  which 
he  and  the  country  might  entertain  to  their  boldness  and 
subversive  tendency. 

The  Queen  who  succeeded  to  the  throne  was  a  young 
Princess  only  eighteen  years  of  age,  and  therefore  only 
just  entitled  to  wear  the  crown  without  a  regency.  Yet 
Queen  Victoria,  conscious  of  her  own  love  of  truth  and 
justice,  told  her  mother,  the  Duchess  of  Kent,  that  she 
ascended  the  throne  with'6ut  alarm.  She  relied,  in  the 
first  place,  on  the  loyal  disposition  and  excellent  char- 
acter of  the  nation  she  was  about  to  govern.  She  had 
in  her  uncle.  King  Leopold  of  Belgium,  and  his  organ, 
Baron  Stockmar,  whose  memoirs  have  lately  been  pub- 
lished, access  to  the  wisest  and  most  prudent  advice. 
Her  Minister,  Lord  Melbourne,  whom  she  maintained  in 
office,  submitted  to  her  decision  counsels  the  most  con- 
stitutional, free  from  any  taint  of  self-interest  or  party 
prejudice.  As  I  held  the  position  of  Secretary  of  State 
for  the  Home  Department  and  leader  of  the  Ministerial 
party  in  the  House  of  Commons,  it  was  incumbent  on 
me  to  consider  what  was  my  duty  to  the  Crown  and  to 
the  country.  We  all  know  the  prayer  for  the  High 
Court  of  Parliament,  to  be  read  during  their  session, 
that  '  Thou  wouldst  be  pleased  to  direct  and  prosper  all 
their  consultations  to  the  advancement  of  thy  glory,  the 
good  of  thy  Church,  the  safety,  honor,  and  welfare  of 
our  Sovereign  and  her  dominions  ;  that  all  things  may 
be  so  ordered  and  settled  by  their  endeavors,  upon  the 
best  and  surest  foundations,  that  peace  and  happiness, 
truth  and  justice,  religion  and  piety,  may  be  established 
among  us  for  all  generations.'     This  is  not  a  prayer 


188  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

*  that  all  things  may  be  so  ordered  and  settled  by  their 
endeavors,  that  peace  and  happiness,  truth  and  justice, 
religion  and  piety,*  may  endure  for  a  quarter  of  a  cen- 
tury, or  half  a  century,  or  even  for  a  century,  but  '  that 
they  may  be  established  among  us  for  all  generations.' 

I  had  felt  the  value  and  efficacy  of  this  prayer,  and 
had  endeavored  to  observe  its  purport  in  the  measures 
I  proposed  and  the  language  I  held,  as  conductor  of 
the  business  of  the  Government  for  the  Crown  in  the 
House  of  Commons.  But  I  could  not  disguise  from 
myself  or  from  Parliament  the  knowledge  that  there 
were  in  the  House  of  Commons  men  who  departed  very 
widely  from  those  principles  which,  under  the  lead  of 
the  Whig  party,  had  maintained  the  House  of  Hanover 
upon  the  throne,  had  promoted  civil  and  religious 
liberty,  had  allowed  every  man  to  woi-ship  according 
to  the  dictates  of  his  own  conscience,  and  which  had 
preserved  among  all  changes  loyalty  to  the  Crown  and 
to  the  Constitution. 

I  could  neither  hear  in  silence  nor  abet  the  progress 
of  measures  intended  to  destroy  the  aristocracy  and  up- 
root the  Church  of  England :  my  resistance  was  crowned 
with  success,  and  before  the  Ministry  was  changed,  Mr. 
Grote,  Sir  W.  Moleswoi-th,  and  Mr.  Charles  Duller  were 
entirely  discomfited.  But  Mr.  Grote  and  Mr.  Henry 
"Warburton  did  not  desert  the  principles  of  government 
which  they  had  embraced  after  reflection  and  inquiry. 
The  Poor  Law  Amendment  Act,  brought  forward  in 
spite  of  popular  dislike  and  the  powerful  opposition  of 
the  *  Times '  newspaper,  which  was  neither  scrupulous 
nor  temperate,  was  warmly  supported  by  Mr.  Grote. 
It  is  thus  noticed  in  the  work  entitled  '  Personal  Life 
of  George  Grote ' :  — 

*  The  most  important  measure,  however,  brought  for- 


PHILOSOPHICAL  RADICALS.  189 

ward  during  the  session  of  1834  was  the  Poor  Law 
Amendment  Act ;  perhaps  the  most  creditable  achieve- 
ment of  the  Whig  party.  It  was  carried,  after  active 
discussions  and  considerable  opposition,  by  a  large  ma- 
jority. I  doubt  whether,  at  any  period  since  1834,  so 
thorough  and  sound  a  change  in  our  domestic  machinery 
could  have  been  brought  about.  That  it  should  at  the 
present  time  have  become  partially  ineffective,  is  owing 
to  the  altered  tone  of  public  opinion,  on  the  character 
of  which,  however,  it  is  beside  my  province  here  to 
enter.'  ^ 

The  policy  of  the  Philosophical  Radicals  at  this  time 
is  well  defined  in  a  letter  of  Mr.  Henry  Warburton's :  — 

'  Expression  is  to  be  given  to  public  opinion,  and  the 
Whigs  are  to  be  made  to  feel  the  force  of  it,  in  constit- 
uencies, by  keeping  them  constantly  in  a  state  of  alarm 
of  being  ousted  by  Radical  competitors  —  in  Parliament, 
by  occasional  threats  of  being  voted  against  by  their 
Radical  allies.  In  a  certain  state  of  disquietude  it  is 
our  business  always  to  keep  them ;  the  pressure  is  to  be 
heightened  or  moderated  according  to  circumstances, 
and  the  magnitude  and  proximity  of  the  objects  we 
hope  to  carry.  But  so  long  as  there  exists  any  material 
difference  in  the  weight  of  liberal  measures  which  the 
Whigs  and  Tories  severally  are  willing  to  offer  to  us, 
the  highest  bidder,  if  in  possession,  is  not  to  be  ousted 
from  the  Government.' ^ 

Mr.  Warburton,  usually  called  '  Philosopher  Warbur- 
ton,'  acted  loyally  in  support  of  the  opinions  here  set 
forth.  I  often  saw  him,  and  he  did  not  grudge  his 
advice  to  the  Government.     In  1839,  I  think  it  was,  he 


1  'Personal  Life  of  George  Grote/  by  Mrs.  Grote,  pp.  90-9 L 

2  Ibid.  p.  110. 


190  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

urged  upon  me  the  adoption  by  the  Government  of  the 
plan  of  penny-postage  which  had  been  made  known  to 
the  public  by  Mr.  Rowland  Ilill.  I  said  I  thought  the 
plan  very  ingenious,  and  likely  to  confer  great  benefits 
upon  the  public,  but  that  it  would  make  a  temporary 
deficit  in  the  revenue,  which  would  probably  require  to 
be  filled  up  by  new  taxation.  Mr.  Warburton  said  that 
a  new  tax  was  a  great  evil,  and  he  hoped  it  would  be 
avoided.     No  further  conversation  passed  at  that  time. 

Unfortunately,  the  Government  adopted  both  parts 
of  Mr.  Warburton's  advice.  The  Cabinet  was  unani- 
mous in  favor  of  the  ingenious  and  popular  plan  of  a 
penny-postage ;  but  they  ought  to  have  enacted  at  the 
same  time  such  measures  as  would  have  secured  a 
revenue  sufficient  to  defray  the  national  expenditure. 
Failing  to  do  this,  there  was  for  three  years  together  a 
deficit,  which  exposed  the  Government  to  the  powerful 
reproaches  and  unanswerable  objections  of  Sir  Robert 
Peel.  Public  opinion  echoed  those  reproaches  and  those 
objections,  and  produced  such  a  degree  of  discontent 
as  was  in  itself  a  sufficient  ground  for  a  change  of  Ad- 
ministration. 

There  was,  however,  another  ground  of  party  hos- 
tility, which  the  Government  were  willing  to  provoke 
and  eager  to  encounter.  The  Chancellor  of  the  Ex- 
chequer had  pointed  out  to  the  Cabinet  that  a  large 
revenue  might  be  derived  from  the  admission  of  foreign 
sugar,  giving,  at  the  same  time,  the  advantage  of  a  pro- 
tecting duty  to  the  British  Colonies.  He  likewise  pro- 
posed the  admission  of  foreign  timber  on  terms  more 
favorable  than  had  hitherto  been  accorded.  By  one  of 
the  clums}^  contrivances  of  the  system  of  protection,  the 
timber  of  Norway  was  sent  to  Canada  and  brought  back 
to  England,  with  a  view  to  evade  the  high  duty  on 
foreign  timber. 


PROTECTION.  191 

But  there  was  another  article  which,  since  the  year 
1-815,  had  been  a  favorite  object  of  protection  —  this 
was  corn.  By  the  ingenious  machinery  of  a  sliding- 
scale,  corn  was  only  admitted  at  a  low  duty  when 
British  corn  was  at  a  high  price,  and  was  charged  with 
an  enormous  duty  when  British  corn  was  cheap,  or  at 
a  moderate  price  in  the  market. 

I  pointed  out  to  the  Cabinet  that,  of  all  the  griev- 
ances inflicted  upon  the  British  consumer  by  the  system 
of  monopoly  and  protection,  that  which  arose  from  the 
corn  duties  was  the  most  grievous  and  oppressive. 
Lord  Grenville,  in  a  memorable  protest,  had  declared 
that  monopoly  was  the  parent  of  dearness  and  of  scarc- 
ity. The  best  writers  on  political  economy,  several  of 
the  highest  statesmen  and  members  of  the  House  of 
Commons,  had  argued  powerfully  for  the  repeal,  or  at 
least  modification,  of  the  corn  duties. 

I  proposed,  not  a  total  repeal,  but,  in  accordance 
with  some  of  the  best  authorities,  a  moderate  fixed 
duty  on  the  admission  of  foreign  corn. 

The  whole  project,  however,  raised  a  clamorous 
uproar  from  West  Indian  planters.  Colonial  growers 
of  timber,  and,  above  all,  from  the  land-owners,  farmers, 
and  agricultural  laborers  of  England. 

The  Ministry  were  defeated  by  a  majority  of  thirty- 
six  on  their  proposal  with  regard  to  sugar  duties.  The 
Government  resolved  to  dissolve  Parliament.  Sir 
Robert  Peel,  who  was  not  aware  of  the  intention  of 
the  Cabinet,  then  brought  forward  a  vote  of  want  of 
confidence,  which  he  carried,  after  a  long  debate,  by  a 
majority  of  one.  The  general  election,  decided  by  the 
constituent  bodies  of  freeholders  in  the  counties,  and 
10^.  householders  in  boroughs,  gave  to  Sir  Robert  Peel 
a  majority  of  ninety-one  over  the   existing  Ministry. 


192  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

The  Whig  Ministers,  however,  thought  it  due  to  them- 
selves and  fair  to  the  country  to  place  on  record  their 
intention,  had  they  been  successful  in  the  general  elec- 
tion, to  pursue  the  path  of  free  trade,  with  regard  to 
corn,  sugar,  and  timber,  by  making  some  immediate 
reductions,  thus  opening  the  way  to  further  changes 
which  would  save  the  people  at  a  future  peiiod  from 
monopoly  prices  on  behalf  of  the  West  Indian  planters, 
the  Canadian  producers  of  timber,  and  the  land-owners 
and  farmers  of  England,  who  insisted  upon  prices  of 
sugar,  timber,  and  corn  sufiQcient  to  protect  their  own 
interests. 

It  was  thus  that,  as  the  patrons  and  favorers  of  pro- 
tection, in  reference  to  sugar,  timber,  and  corn,  the 
Tory  Ministry  accepted  office  in  September,  1841. 


FREE  TRADE.  193 


CHAPTER  III. 
1846. 

HIS  RESIG- 
NATION IN   1846. —  TRIUMPH   OF  FREE  TRADE. 

The  faults  which  led  to  the  fall  of  the  Whig  Ministry 
in  1841,  and  the  causes  which  led  to  the  election  of  a 
great  majority  ready  to  support  Sir  Robert  Peel  as  a 
Minister  —  a  majority  of  not  less  than  ninety-one  —  are 
sufficiently  known.  Lord  Melbourne's  Government 
had  committed  the  error  of  conferring  a  benefit  on  the 
people  by  lowering  the  duty  on  letters  to  one  penny, 
without  at  the  same  time  making  adequate  provision 
to  supply  the  temporary  deficiency  in  the  public  income. 
Sir  Robert  Peel  was  not  slow  to  perceive  and  to  take 
advantage  of  this  error,  but  in  laying  down  the  princi- 
ples by  which  his  Government  was  to  be  guided  he 
neglected  the  demands  which  were  sure  to  be  made 
upon  him  for  a  repeal  or  reduction  of  the  duties  on 
corn,  sugar,  and  timber.  When,  iii  the  course  of  the 
following  session,  a  great  number  of  manufacturers  and 
tradesmen  came  to  me  to  complain  of  the  abolition  of 
protection,  I  remember  that,  among  others,  a  bootmaker 
said,  '  I  work  very  hard  all  the  week,  but  only  on  one 
day  of  the  week  can  I  afford  for  my  wife  and  myself  a 
dish  of  meat  for  dinner.  It  is  very  hard  that  I  should 
be  deprived  of  protection  for  my  trade,  while  the  great 
owners  of  land  have  the  fullest  protection  for  the  corn 

13 


194  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

which  their  tenants  produce.'  I  could  only  say  that  I 
could  not  give  him  hope  of  immediate  relief,  but  that 
the  protection  given  to  corn  was  a  grievance  so  palpable 
and  so  enormous  that  the  House  of  Commons  could  not 
long  leave  him  without  a  remedy. 

This  defect  made,  in  fact,  the  weakness  of  Sir  Robert 
Peel's  position —  a  defect  of  which  one  of  his  colleagues, 
Lord  Aberdeen,  was  fully  sensible. 

On  the  part  of  the  Whigs,  I  had  declared  my  inten- 
tion of  proposing  a  fixed  duty  on  corn.  This  was 
likewise  an  error.  Cobden  and  Bright  proposed  the 
only  natural  course,  that  of  a  total  repeal  of  the  duties 
on  corn.  But  the  Whig  country  gentlemen  were  not 
prepared  for  so  bold  a  measure. 

I  have  already  remarked  that  the  Tory  party  made 
a  great  mistake,  when,  in  1815,  the  war  being  over,  and 
the  power  of  Napoleon,  for  a  time  at  least,  extinguished, 
they  did  not  entirely  change  their  policy,  and,  instead 
of  keeping  up  the  defence  and  promotion  of  measures 
which  war  alone  could  justify,  and  which  the  influence 
of  Pitt  caused  to  prevail  in  the  House  of  Commons, 
they  did  not  consider  wisely,  liberally,  and  maturely 
what  was  the  policy  which  in  days  of  peace  might  be 
expected  to  prevail  in  Parliament  and  in  the  nation. 

Pitt  himself,  from  1784  to  1792,  had  espoused  large 
and  popular  principles ;  he  had,  in  1782,  and  even  so 
late  as  1786,  proposed  parliamentary  reform.  In  1786 
he  gave  his  sanction,  by  a  treaty  of  commerce  with 
France,  to  those  principles  of  free  trade  which  he  had 
imbibed  from  Adam  Smith.  Even  during  the  war,  by 
combining  the  admission  of  Roman  Catholics  to  oflBee 
and  to  Parliament  with  the  measures  rendered  neces- 
sary for  the  Union,  he  gave  his  solemn  and  deliberate 
sanction  to  the  principle  of  religious  liberty. 


POLICY  OF  PEACE.  195 

A  statesman  who  could  approve  of  parliariientary  re- 
form, however  mitigated,  of  free  trade,  however  modi- 
fied, and  of  religious  liberty,  howevei^- guarded,  cannot 
be  esteemed  other  than  a  Liberal  politician.  But,  as 
Canning  truly  said,  the  gpe^t'  bulk  of  the  Tory  party, 
professing  to  worship  Pitt,  adored  him  as  the  Pagans  of 
the  East  adore  the  sun  —  only  in  his  eclipse. 

In  1817,  Lord  Castlereagh  advised  Parliament  to  sus- 
pend the  Habeas  Corpus  Act.  But,  as  Sir  Samuel 
Romilly  well  remarked,  the  measure  that  was  well 
fitted  to  defeat  a  few  secret  conspirators  was  entirely 
out  of  place  as  a  weapon  with  which  to  contend  against 
the  discontented  mass  of  a  nation. 

The  Tory  policy  from  1819  to  1829  was  in  conform- 
ity with  inspirations  of  Tory  prejudice.  In  1829,  the 
Roman  Catholic  claims  were  conceded,  but  they  were 
conceded  rather  to  avert  the  danger  of  civil  war  than 
as  a  homage  to  the  great  principle  of  religious  liberty. 
The  Tory  party  still  clung  to  the  maintenance  of  the 
exclusive  and  intolerant  Protestant  Church  of  Ireland ; 
to  the  exclusion,  by  heavy  duties,  of  foreign  corn ;  to 
the  refusal  of  parliamentary  reform ;  to  the  refusal  of 
admission  of  even  the  highest  of  the  working-classes  to 
the  privilege  of  giving  votes  for  the  choice  of  repre- 
sentatives in  Parliament. 

It  is  true  that  by  fits  and  starts,  when  public  opinion 
has  been  too  strong  for  them,  the  Tory  party,  in  the 
disguise  of  Conservatives,  have  made  large  concessions. 
In  1829,  Sir  Robert  Peel,  after  a  long  and  fruitless 
battle,  in  the  course  of  which  he  contended  that  those 
who  held  the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation  were  unfit 
to  sit  in  Parliament,  admitted  the  Roman  Catholics  to 
legislative  and  ministerial  power.  In  1846,  the  same 
Sir  Robert  Peel  ceased  to  defend  the  Corn-laws,  which 


1§6_  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

he  had  upi^eld  from  the  time  of  his  entrance  into  Par- 
liament. In  1865,  Mr.  Disraeli,  who  had  succeeded  to 
the  lead  of  the  Tory  party,  and  had  applauded  the 
House  of  Commons  for  having  refused  to  degrade  the 
suffrage,  seemed  prepared  still  to  defend  the  entrench- 
ments of  1831.  But  in  the  folio wiog  year  he  gave  up 
the  whole  question,  and  lowered  the  franchise,  not,  as 
his  predecessors  had  proposed,  by  a  gradual  widening 
of  the  gate  of  admission,  but  by  a  jump  —  which  was 
called  by  his  chief  and  master  a  leap  in  the  dark  —  to 
all  the  householders  in  the  towns.  It  remained  to  be 
considered  whether  a  great  party  which  shared,  with 
the  Whigs  and  Radicals,  the  representation  of  England, 
which  has  for  many  years  asked  for  and  enjoyed  the 
confidence  of  hundreds  of  thousands  of  its  people,  is 
entitled  to  retain  that  confidence,  on  the  ground  that  it 
has  violated  all  its  pledges,  renounced  its  most  cherished 
principles,  and  exposed  the  country  to  dangers  at  which 
it  affected  to  be  seriously  alarmed,  and  whether,  on  the 
plea  of  its  ability  and  dexterity,  it  shall  govern  the 
country  on  principles  for  the  profession  of  which  it  held 
up  its  adversaries  to  odium  at  each  recurring  session, 
and  shall  obtain  followers  on  the  ground  that  there  are 
still  some  principles  to  which  it  is  sincerely  attached, 
and  which  neither  the  clamor  of  a  mob  nor  the  prospect 
of  power  and  office  will  induce  it  to  abandon. 

Experience,  so  far  as  it  has  gone,  shows  that  public 
opinion  is  unfavorable  to  these  sudden  turns  of  policy, 
and  to  the  relinquishment  of  doctrines  wliich  had  been 
professed  for  years,  enforced  by  all  the  cogency  of  argu- 
ment, and  illustrated  by  all  the  splendor  of  eloquence. 
It  is  to  be  noted  that  these  great  concessions  of  prin- 
ciple, hitherto  a  mark  of  Tory  policy,  have  not  beeu 
approved  by  the  nation. 


CHANGES   OF  TORY  POLICY.  197 

In  1829,  Sir  Robert  Peel  yielded  the  Roman  Catholic 
claims.  In  1830,  the  House  of  Commons  changed  the 
Ministry.  In  1846,  Sir  Robert  Peel  gave  up  the  Corn- 
laws.  In  the  same  year  the  House  of  Commons  refused 
him  their  confidence,  and  the  Ministry  was  changed. 
In  1867,  Mr.  Disraeli  gave  up  his  opposition  to  further 
reform,  and,  to  use  his  own  phrase,  '  degraded  the  suf- 
frage '  to  household  voters.  But,  in  1868,  upon  a  dis- 
solution of  Parliament,  his  Ministry  was  so  thoroughly 
discomfited  that  he  retired  from  office  without  waiting 
for  a  Parliamentary  defeat. 

Thus,  it  appears  that  either  the  House  of  Commons 
or  the  nation  at  large  have  used  their  power  of  rejection 
to  condemn  Ministers  who,  after  long  resistance,  have 
conceded  measures  which  for  many  years  they  had 
represented  in  their  speeches  as  treason  to  their  country, 
as  outrage  to  all  principle,  and  as  destruction  to  the 
party  of  which  they  were  the  leaders.  On  what  ground 
has  this  Parliamentary  and  popular  withdrawal  of  con- 
fidence been  pronounced?  Lord  Cottenham,  a  direct 
man  and  a  straightforward  statesman,  expressed  to  me 
his  opinion  on  Sir  Robert  Peel's  assent  to  the  repeal  of 
the  Corn-laws.  'Either,'  he  said,  'Sir  Robert  Peel 
foresaw  the  necessity  of  giving  up  his  opposition  to  the 
repeal  of  the  Corn-laws,  or  he  did  not.  If  he  foresaw 
it,  he  was  wanting  in  honesty  when  he  persevered  in 
his  opposition.  If  he  did  not  foresee  it,  he  was  want- 
ing in  wisdom,  and  is  not  fit  to  be  intrusted  with  the 
supreme  direction  of  this  great  Empire.' 

The  House  of  Commons  in  two  instances,  and  the 
electors  of  the  House  of  Commons  in  a  third  instance, 
have  confirmed  the  logical  conclusion  of  Lord  Cotten- 
ham, and  have  withdrawn  their  confidence  from  Minis- 
ters who  had  made  themselves  remarkable  by  reprobation 


198  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

of  all  the  doctrines  on  the  maintenance  of  which  they 
paraded  their  claims  to  confidence.  It  must  be  admit- 
ted, however,  that  a  time  of  condonation  comes,  and  I 
could  not  refuse  assistance  to  Sir  Robert  Peel  in  1846 
on  the  sole  ground  of  his  change  of  opinion. 

I  did  not,  therefore,  act  on  this  ground  alone,  in 
voting  against  the  Protection  of  Life  Bill,  introduced 
by  Sir  Robert  Peel's  Government  in  1846 ;  but  I  ob- 
jected to  the  bill  on  Irish  grounds.  I  then  thought, 
and  I  still  think,  that  it  is  wrong  to  arrest  men  and 
to  put  them  in  prison  on  the  ground  that  they  may  be 
murderers  and  house-breakers.  They  may  be,  on  the 
other  hand,  honest  laborers  going  home  from  their  work. 
I  think  every  means  should  be  adopted  for  discovering 
the  perpetrators  of  crime  and  bringing  them  to  justice. 
I  think  that  for  this  purpose  it  is  right  to  give  the 
majority  of  a  jury  power  to  convict,  upon  sufficient 
evidence,  a  man  accused  of  murder.  But  I  do  not 
think  that  it  is  right  to  send  a  man  to  prison  upon 
evidence  that  he  has  been  out  at  night  without  any 
further  offence.  The  Ministry  of  Sir  Robert  Peel 
were  defeated  in  1846  by  a  majority  of  more  than 
seventy  on  the  second  reading  of  the  Bill  for  the  Pro- 
tection of  Life  in  Ireland.  Her  Majesty  was  pleased 
to  intrust  to  me  the  task  of  foiming  a  new  Ministry. 
I  endeavored  to  obtain  the  assistance  of  Lord  Dal- 
housie,  Lord  Lincoln,  and  Mr.  Sidney  Herbert.  Fail- 
ing in  that  attempt,  I  had  to  consider  whether  I  could 
propose  a  junction  with  the  party  which  hud  deserted 
Sir  Robert  Peel  on  account  of  his  repeal  of  the  Corn- 
laws,  but  neither  principle  nor  prudence  would  allow 
me  to  do  so.  It  was  on  account  of  our  adherence  to 
the  policy  of  free  trade  that  we  had  been  driven  out 
of  office  in  1841,  and  the  only  course  which  I  could 


NEW  MINISTRY.  199 

honestly  pursue  was  to  go  forward  with  measures  ex- 
tending the  principles  of  commercial  policy  to  which 
Sir  Robert  Peel  had  now  given  his  assent.  But  I 
could  have  no  hope  of  the  assistance  of  the  protection- 
ists in  such  a  policy.  I  therefore,  after  a  long  and 
friendly  conference  with  the  Duke  of  Beaufort,  declined 
to  ask  for  the  assistance  of  his  friends  in  the  formation 
of  a  new  Ministry.  In  the  Administration  which  I 
then  formed,  I  assumed  the  ofSce  of  First  Lord  of  the 
Treasury,  Lord  Cottenham  became  Lord  Chancellor, 
Lord  Lansdowne,  President  of  the  Council,  and  Sir 
George  Grey,  Home  Secretary ;  Lord  Palmerston,  For- 
eign Secretary ;  Earl  Grey,  Colonial  Secretary ;  Mr. 
Charles  Wood,  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer;  Lord 
Clarendon,  President  of  the  Board  of  Trade  ;  and  Mr. 
Macaulay,  who  did  not  like  to  accept  any  office  which 
would  divert  him  from  his  literary  work.  Paymaster 
of  the  Forces.  Mr.  Shell  was  Master  of  the  Mint ;  Sir 
John  Jervis,  Attorney-General ;  Mr.  Dundas,  Solicitor- 
General  ;  the  Earl  of  Bessborough,  Lord  Lieutenant  of 
Ireland ;  and  Mr.  Labouchere,  Chief  Secretarj'^  to  the 
Lord  Lieutenant. 

One  of  the  first  questions  I  undertook  to  settle  was 
that  of  the  admission  of  foreign  sugar,  on  which  I  had 
been  so  signally  defeated  in  1841.  But  on  July  28, 
1846,  when  Lord  George  Bentinck  proposed  not  to  go 
into  Committee  of  Ways  and  Means  on  the  sugar  duty, 
the  ayes,  who,  with  Sir  Robert  Peel,  Mr.  Goulburn, 
Lord  Lincoln,  and  Mr.  Sidney  Herbert,  voted  in  our 
support,  were  265  ;  while  the  noes,  led  by  Lord  George 
Bentinck  and  Mr.  Disraeli,  were  only  130.  The  bill 
I  then  introduced  was  far  more  favorable  to  the  admis- 
sion of  foreign  sugar  than  that  which  had  been  rejected 
in  1841. 


200  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

The  monopoly  which  had  been  enjoyed  in  favor  of 
Colonial  sugar  having  thus  failed,  it  was  obvious  that 
the  progress  of  free  trade  would  have  the  active  sup- 
port of  Sir  Robert  Peel  and  his  friends.  Sir  Robert, 
after  the  fall  of  his  Ministry,  behaved  to  me  and  to 
my  Administration  in  the  most  fair  and  honorable  man- 
ner. Sir  James  Graham  likewise  gave  his  important 
and  valuable  support  to  the  cause  of  free  trade  when- 
ever its  principles  were  in  question.  In  1848,  on  the 
proposal  to  repeal  the  Navigation  Laws,  which  Adam 
Smith  held  ought  to  be  an  exception  to  his  theory,  the 
speech  of  Sir  James  Graham  was  the  best  that  was 
made  for  the  repeal.  In  fact,  Sir  Robert  Peel  and  his 
friends  devoted  all  their  energies  to  the  promotion  of 
free  trade,  and  gave  their  handsome  support  to  the 
Ministers  who  had  now  become  the  leaders  and  chiefs 
in  that  great  cause. 

I  may  take  this  opportunity  of  adverting  to  the 
progress  of  free  trade,  to  the  caution  with  which  it 
was  first  proposed  as  a  principle  to  guide  our  policy, 
the  bitterness  with  which  it  was  assailed,  the  triumphs 
it  has  won,  the  benefits  it  has  conferred  upon  the  coun- 
try, the  refutation  experience  has  given  to  all  the 
arguments  by  which  it  was  opposed,  the  prosperity  it 
has  introduced  into  our  finance,  and  the  prospect  it 
gives  that  trade  will  spread  over  the  world  its  powerful 
and  beneficent  influence. 

It  is  bare  justice  to  acknowledge  that  Mr.  Huskisson 
and  Mr.  Canning  were  the  first  to  make  a  breach  in 
the  wall  of  prohibition  and  protection,  which  was  de- 
fended with  so  much  obstinacy  by  the  old  Tory  party, 
and  by  many  prejudiced  Whigs.  The  proposal  of  Mr. 
Huskisson  in  regard  to  silk  goods  was  apparently  modest 
and  timid :  he  proposed  that  after  three  yeai*s'  interval 


FREE  TRADE.  201 

the  prohibition  of  foreign  silk  goods  should  be  ex- 
changed for  a  duty  of  thirty  per  cent  ad  valorem, 
Mr.  Huskisson  was  attacked,  not  only  with  argument, 
but  with  invective,  as  a  man  whose  proposal  of  ad- 
mission of  foreign  silks,  on  any  terms,  proved  him  to 
have  a  bad  heart.  It  was  in  vain  that  Mr.  Canning 
declared  that  those  who  opposed  improvement  because 
it  was  innovation  would  have  to  submit  to  innovation 
which  was  no  improvement.  I  had  the  satisfaction, 
with  Mr.  Brougham  and  many  others,  of  assisting  in 
the  triumph  of  Mr.  Huskisson  over  prejudice  and  igno- 
rance. Mr.  Huskisson  came  to  the  Commons  one  day, 
with  a  small  octavo  volume  in  his  hand,  which  he  was 
proud  to  declare  contained  the  whole  tariff  of  customs' 
duty  left  existing  on  the  statute-book.  The  Reform 
Act  of  1832  was  favorable  to  enlightened  views  of 
commercial  policy,  and  opened  the  way  to  further  re- 
forms. Mr.  Cobden  and  Mr.  Bright  obtained  seats  in 
the  House  of  Commons,  the  former  for  Yorkshire,  the 
latter  for  the  city  of  Durham.  My  Whig  friends,  who 
represented  counties,  alarmed  at  the  proposal  of  sub- 
jecting corn  to  a  fixed  duty  of  no  more  than  eight 
shillings,  contributed  to  the  defeat  of  the  Ministry,  by 
a  vote  of  want  of  confidence,  in  1841.  The  leaders  of 
the  Whigs  advised  me,  in  1845,  not  to  vote  for  a  total 
repeal  of  the  Corn-laws ;  but  domestic  affairs  having 
taken  me  to  Edinburgh,  I  there  wrote  a  letter  to  my 
constituents,  declaring  myself  in  favor  of  total  repeal, 
which  produced  a  great  effect.  Mr.  Cobden  and  Mr. 
Bright,  sacrificing  their  health  for  the  public  good, 
obtained  in  that  year,  for  the  first  time,  the  adherence 
of  the  working-classes.  The  '  Times '  newspaper  pro- 
claimed that  the  Anti-Corn-Law  League  was  a  great 
fact. 


202  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

Sir  Robert  Peel  proposed  that  the  duty  on  corn 
should  be  reduced  to  one  shilling  per  quarter,  which 
amounted  to  about  two  per  cent  on  the  current  price 
of  wheat.  I  considered  myself  bound  to  carry  on  the 
march  of  the  free  trade  army  against  monopolies  in 
favor  of  Colonial  sugar,  of  Canadian  timber,  and  of 
English  ships.  Lord  Derby  predicted  that  this  last 
concession  to  free  trade  would  utterly  ruin  the  mer- 
chant-shipping of  England.  An  English  ship-builder, 
who  had  defended  with  perseverance  the  monopoly  of 
England,  showed  his  spirit  by  immediately  ordering 
the  building  of  twelve  new  ships  for  the  mercantile 
marine. 

The  progress  of  free  trade  has  been  constant,  vic- 
torious, and  irresistible. 

It  was  supposed,  and  boldly  asserted,  that  the  ex- 
change of  high  duties  on  foreign  manufactures  would 
destro}*"  the  revenue  of  customs  and  excise.  The  re- 
turns of  the  revenue  for  the  year  ending  on  December 
31,  1873,  sufficiently  prove  the  fallacy  of  this  expec- 
tation. It  was  expected  that  on  the  31st  of  March, 
1874,  a  surplus  of  upwards  of  five  millions  would 
exhibit  the  flourishing  state  of  our  finances.  Men  who 
consult  the  Parliamentary  history  of  England  from 
1823  to  1873  will  rejoice  to  acknowledge  that  the  most 
enlightened  members  of  our  Parliament,  the  Liberal 
Tories  of  1846,  Sir  Robert  Peel,  Mr.  Sidney  Herbert, 
Sir  James  Graham,  and  Lord  Aberdeen,  together  with 
the  Whigs,  who  for  half  a  century  have  held  the  posi- 
tion of  her  Majesty's  Ministers  and  lier  Majesty's  Oppo- 
sition, together  with  Mr.  Cobden  and  Mr.  Bright,  and 
many  Radical  members  of  the  House  of  Commons, 
have  labored  to  destroy  the  restrictions  which  fettered 
British  industry  and  British  trade,  and  have  thereby 


FREE  TRADE.  203 

conferred  immense  benefits  on  their  country.  An  old 
French  merchant  said  to  Colbert,  when  he  was  impos- 
ing restrictions  on  the  entry  of  Dutch  manufactures, 
and  thereby  cramping  the  silk  manufactures  of  France, 
'  Laissez  faire  et  laissez  passer ^^  meaning  thereby  that 
he  should  not  prescribe  the  length  and  breadth  of  the 
loom,  or  impose  penalties  on  workmen  who  did  not 
adhere  to  the  ministerial  measurement ;  that  he  should 
not  forbid  the  entry  of  Dutch  toys  into  France,  or  in- 
directly discourage  the  exportation  of  French  wines  to 
Holland. 

These  facts,  which  have  been  much  misunderstood, 
contain  the  very  simple  secret  of  free  trade.  In  speak- 
ing to  my  constituents  of  the  city  of  London  of  the 
repeal  of  the  Corn-laws,  I  said  that  it  was  barbarous  to 
prevent  the  manufacturer  of  Lancashire  from  sending 
his  yard  of  cotton  cloth  to  Ohio,  or  to  prevent  the 
farmer  in  Ohio  from  sending  his  bushel  of  corn  to  Lan- 
cashire. 

Nor  can  I  foresee  a  time  when  the  British  manufact- 
urer will  no  longer  find  a  market  for  his  goods  in  other 
parts  of  the  world.  The  population  of  Great  Britain  is 
so  cabined,  cribbed,  confined  to  the  land  of  the  British 
Isles,  that  our  manufacturing  towns  will  always  be  very 
populous,  and  there  will  exist  for  a  long  time  vast  ter- 
ritories in  North  and  South  America,  in  the  plains  of 
Buenos  Ayres,  in  the  hills  and  dales  of  Australia  and 
New  Zealand,  where  herds  of  cattle  may  find  plentiful , 
pasture,  and  the  grower  of  corn  receive  an  ample  re- 
muneration for  his  labor.  The  evil  genius  of  protection 
may  prevail  in  the  Senate  and  the  Congress  of  the  United 
States,  may  animate  selfish  parties  in  the  Legislatures  of 
the  British  Colonies,  but  these  obstacles  must  be  over- 
come.    Poets  have  sung  the  advantages  of  trade.     Vir- 


204  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

gil  has  said,  that  on  one  soil  the  growth  of  com  may 
flourish,  and  that  on  another  the  grape  will  find  its 
proper  nutriment:  'Hie  segetes,  illic  veniunt  felicius 
uvae.'  Waller  has  said,  speaking  of  English  com- 
merce :  — 

The  taste  of  hot  Arabia's  spice  we  know, 
Free  from  the  scorching  sun  that  makes  it  grow ; 
Without  the  worm,  in  Persian  silks  we  shine ; 
And,  without  planting,  drink  of  every  wine.^ 

Pope,  in  a  later  age,  has  said :  — 

The  time  shall  come  when,  free  as  seas  or  wind, 
Unbounded  Thames  shall  flow  for  all  mankind ; 
Whole  nations  enter  with  each  swelling  tide, 
And  seas  but  join  the  nations  they  divide. 

Man  has  contrived,  not  only  by  sanguinary  wars,  but 
by  the  poison  of  commercial  duties  and  vexatious  pro- 
hibitions in  time  of  peace,  to  bar  the  intercourse  between 
nations.  It  belongs  to  benevolent  humanity  and  friendly 
policy  to  find  a  remedy  for  these  evils,  to  make  the  com- 
mandment, '  to  fill  the  world,'  the  source  of  new  bless- 
ings, and  forge  a  chain  of  love  which  shall  unite  all  the 
races  of  mankind. 

1  *  Panegyric  to  my  Lord  Protector.* 


PHILOSOPHICAL  RADICALS.  205 


CHAPTER  IV. 

DEFEAT    OF     THE     PHILOSOPHICAL    RADICALS.  —  SUP- 
PRESSION OF  THE   CHARTIST  RIOTS,   1848. 

Questions  still  more  urgent,  if  not  more  important, 
than  those  debated  in  1846  were  agitated  in  1848. 
A  strong  attack  was  made  hj  the  Economists,  headed 
by  Mr.  Hume,  and  by  the  Philosophers,  led  by  Sir 
William  Molesworth,  upon  the  expenditure  of  the 
State.  The  motion  made  by  Mr.  Hume  on  the  25th 
of  February  was  exceedingly  vague ;  it  was  to  this 
effect :  — 

'  That  it  is  expedient  that  the  expenditure  of  the 
country  should  be  reduced,  not  only  to  render  an  increase 
of  taxation  in  this  session  unnecessary,  but  that  the 
expenditure  should  be  further  reduced  as  speedily  as 
possible,  to  admit  of  a  reduction  of  the  present  large 
amount  of  taxation.' 

The  circumstances  in  which  this  motion  was  brought 
forward  were  somewhat  critical  for  me.  During  the 
winter  I  had  been  afflicted  with  an  illness  which, 
although  not  alarming,  was  a  warning  to  me  to  be  cau- 
tious in  regard  to  my  health.  My  medical  adviser  in-' 
sisted  on  my  having  rest  and  change  of  air.  I  went  to 
St.  Leonards,  and  after  a  few  days'  repose  there  returned, 
much  restored,  to  London  with  Charles  Buller. 

I  spoke  in  the  debate  on  Hume's  motion,  and  said 
'that  among  the  opponents  of  the  Government  were 


206  RECOLLECTIONS  AND   SUGGESTIONS. 

some  who  wished  to  see  the  prevalence  of  low  establish- 
ments, low  estimates,  and  low  views.'  On  a  division 
the  majority  who  supported  the  Government  were  one 
hundred  and  fifty-seven,  the  noes  in  the  minority,  fifty- 
nine  ;  giving  a  majority  of  ninety-eight  in  favor  of  the 
Government.  In  the  majority  were  Mr.  Gladstone,  Sir 
James  Graham,  and  Sir  Robert  Peel ;  in  the  minority 
were  Sir  William  Molesworth,  Mr.  Bright,  and  Mr. 
Cobden.  Most  people  felt  that  the  majority  of  ninety- 
eight  showed  the  adherence  of  the  House  of  Commons 
to  the  cause  of  constitutional  freedom,  hereditary  mon- 
archy, and  national  independence.  The  Opposition 
received  the  support  of  members  who  were  not  really 
their  allies,  but  the  undisguised  abettors  of  violence, 
anarchy,  and  disorder.  This  question  requires  further 
elucidation. 

The  events  on  the  Continent,  in  the  early  part  of  this 
year,  were  striking  and  calamitous.  In  Paris,  King 
Louis  Philippe,  who  had  reigned  for  eighteen  years,  was 
compelled  to  abdicate,  and  a  Republic  was,  by  popular 
violence,  installed  at  the  Hotel  de  Ville.  At  Vienna, 
the  Imperial  Government  was  overthrown,  and  the 
leaders  of  the  mob,  whom  Prince  Windischgriitz  styled 
*  la  canaille,^  were  substituted  for  the  regular  author- 
ities. In  Prussia,  the  garrison  of  Berlin  was  ordered  by 
the  King  to  withdraw  from  the  capital ;  and  the  King's 
brother,  the  present  Emperor  of  Germany,  sought  in 
Buckingham  Palace  a  place  of  refuge. 

In  London,  threats  of  disorder  and  announcements 
of  an  impending  revolution  were  not  wanting.  It  was 
reported  that  Count  Metternich,  whose  mind  was  intent 
upon  all  the  movements  of  the  machine  he  had  so  long 
directed,  said,  at  his  whist-table,  that  of  all  the  revolu- 
tions threatening  Europe,  the  most  violent  and  destmc- 


CHARTISTS.  207 

tive  would  be  that  of  England,  giving  as  his  reason  that 
Jacobinism  had  already  done  its  worst  to  a  great  extent 
in  France,  Austria,  Prussia,  and  Italy,  but  that  in  Eng- 
land the  Church  and  the  aristocracy  had  immense  rev- 
enues still  untouched,  and  ready  to  be  the  spoil  of  the 
ravenous  democracy  which  was  working  its  will  over 
the  European  monarchies.  It  was  proclaimed  that  a 
petition  containing  three  millions  of  signatures  would  be 
presented  to  the  House  of  Commons,  and  that  a  numer- 
ous assemblage,  followed  by  multitudes  of  the  people  of 
London,  would  accompany  the  bearers  of  this  petition 
to  the  House  of  Commons. 

My  first  notion  was,  that  the  bearers  of  the  petition, 
with  their  sympathizers,  might  be  allowed  to  cross 
Westminster  Bridge,  and  after  delivering  their  petition 
at  the  doors  of  Parliament,  might  be  turned  off  by  the 
police  to  Charing  Cross  and  the  Stra.nd.  But  a  friend 
of  mine,  of  great  experience  and  acknowledged  sagacity, 
deemed  that  there  was  some  danger  in  this  course,  and 
that  a  better  measure  of  precaution  would  be  to  prevent 
the  expected  crowd  from  crossing  the  bridges.  Per- 
ceiving the  wisdom  of  this  advice,  I  requested  the 
Commissioners  of  Police,  Sir  Charles  Rowan  and  Sir 
Richard  Mayne,  to  prepare  a  programme  of  proceedings 
for  the  appointed  day,  the  10th  of  April,  and  to  attend 
a  Cabinet  fixed  for  a  previous  day.  I  requested  the 
Duke  of  Wellington  also  to  do  me  the  favor  to  attend 
the  Cabinet. 

When  the  Cabinet  met.  Sir  George  Grey,  the  Home 
Secretary,  being  fully  prepared  for  the  duties  incumbent 
upon  him,  I  asked  Sir  Charles  Rowan  to  read  the  pro- 
gramme proposed  by  the  Commissioners  of  Police. 
When  he  had  done  reading,  I  asked  the  Duke  of 
Wellington  if  the  arrangement  appeared  to  him  to  be 


208  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

judicious,  and  I  had  the  good  fortune  to  obtain  the 
approbation  of  that  great  man.  It  was  understood  that 
the  troops  to  be  brought  to  London  were  to  be  kept  out 
of  sight,  and  that  no  military  force  was  to  appear  unless 
action  on  their  part  should  be  absolutely  necessary. 
On  the  evening  of  April  9  I  received  two  anonjnnous 
letters,  which  convinced  me  that  the  leaders  of  the 
movement,  either  hopeless  of  success  or  awed  by  our 
preparations,  had  renounced  any  intention  of  using 
physical  force. 

Accordingly,  on  the  10th  of  April,  great  numbers 
having  gone  from  every  part  of  the  town  to  Kennington 
Common,  Sir  Richard  Mayne  went  on  horseback  to  the 
scene  of  action.  He  told  a  policeman  to  go  to  Fergus 
O'Connor,  who  had  taken  up  his  position  on  a  magnifi- 
cent car,  and  request  him  to  descend  from  his  height 
and  come  to  his  stirrup  on  foot.  The  part  of  the  mob 
which  surrounded  the  car  remonstrated  with  Fergus 
O'Connor,  and  desired  him  not  to  attend  to  the  message. 
O'Connor  called  out  to  his  followers,  '  Be  silent,  you 
fools  ;  don't  say  a  word  to  prevent  my  going  to  my  best 
friend.  Sir  Richard  Mayne.'  He  then  descended  from 
his  seat  and  went  to  Sir  Richard  Mayne,  who  told  him 
that  he  could  go  no  further,  but  that  if  he  would  de- 
liver the  petition  to  the  police,  a  cab  should  be  furnished 
to  three  of  the  petitioners,  who,  if  unaccompanied  by 
any  force,  might  cross  Westminster  Bridge  in  safety 
and  deliver  the  petition  at  the  door  of  the  House  of 
Commons.  After  this  every  thing  was  quiet.  No  great 
numbers  followed  the  cab  which  contained  the  petition ; 
there  was  no  mob  at  the  door  of  the  House  of  Com- 
mons, and  London  escaped  the  fate  of  Paris,  Berlin,  and 
Vienna.  For  my  own  part,  I  saw  in  these  proceedings 
a  fresh  proof  that  the  people  of  England  were  satisfied 


REPEAL  OF  THE   NAVIGATION  LAWS.  209 

with  the  government  under  which  they  had  the  happi- 
ness to  live,  did  not  wish  to  be  instructed  by  their 
neighbors  in  the  principles  of  freedom,  and  did  not 
envy  them  either  the  liberty  they  had  enjoyed  under 
Robespierre  or  the  order  which  had  been  established 
among  them  by  Napoleon  the  Great. 

On  May  8,  1849,  the  bill  for  the  repeal  of  the  Naviga- 
tion Laws  was  read  a  second  time  in  the  House  of  Lords 
by  a  majority  of  ten.  In  the  majority  were  the  Duke  of 
Wellington,  the  Earl  of  Aberdeen,  and  the  Earl  of  Ripon. 
There  were  likewise  three  archbishops  and  eleven  bish- 
ops, while  in  the  minority  there  were  only  six  bishops, 
making  a  majority  of  eight  of  the  archbishops  and  bish- 
0]ps  out  of  the  total  majority  of  ten. 

I  had  on  this  occasion,  as  on  many  others,  the  advan- 
tage of  the  support  of  the  House  of  Lords,  which  I 
should  not  have  received  if  I  had  introduced  into  the 
House  of  Commons  measures  of  a  more  radical  com- 
plexion. If,  for  instance,  I  had  coupled  with  the  pro- 
posals of  the  Government  a  bill  affecting  the  Irish 
Protestant  Church,  I  should  have  encountered  the 
hostility  of  the  whole  Tory  majority  in  the  House  of 
Lords  upon  those  measures,  and  should  probably  have 
been  defeated  by  the  Earl  of  Derby,  who  made  a  vigor- 
ous and  powerful  speech  against  the  repeal  of  the  Navi- 
gation Laws. 

My  enemies,  of  course,  pointed  with  the  satisfaction 
of  spite  at  the  absence  of  measures  of  a  more  decided 
stamp,  such  as  the  admission  of  a  larger  number  of  the 
working-classes  to  the  mass  of  electors,  and  the  reduc- 
tion of  the  revenuea  of  the  Church  of  Ireland.  But 
there  are  times  when  it  is  prudent  for  Whigs,  moderate 
Tories,  and  Radicals  to  join  in  measures  of  reform  and 
progress,  upon  which  they  can  agree,  and  to  leave  for  a 

14 


210  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

more  favorable  season  measures  of  progress  for  which 
there  is  only  a  slender  majority  in  the  House  of  Com- 
mons, and  upon  which  they  are  sure  to  be  defeated  in 
the  House  of  Lords.  The  Tory  party  is  sometimes  rep- 
resented as  obstructing  every  step  in  political  progress. 
But  this  is  not  so.  In  a  speech  in  the  city  of  London, 
I  described  the  Liberal  party,  alluding  chiefly  to  the 
Whigs,  as  anxious  to  reform  and  to  preserve,  while  I 
described  the  Tories  as  desirous  to  preserve  and  to 
reform.  The  cause  of  truth  and  justice  gains  nothing 
by  unfair  exaggerations.  The  names  of  Pitt,  Huskis- 
son.  Canning,  Sir  Robert  Peel,  Sir  James  Graham,  and 
Mr.  Gladstone,  must  always  be  inscribed  with  honor  in 
the  annals  of  free  trade. 

I  do  not  think  it  necessary  to  enter  into  any  minute 
explanation  of  my  reasons  for  introducing  a  bill  for  the 
Prevention  of  the  Assumption  of  Ecclesiastical  Titles  by 
Prelates  appointed  by  the  Pope.  The  object  of  that 
bill  was  merely  to  assert  the  supremacy  of  the  Crown. 
It  was  never  intended  to  prosecute  any  Roman  Cathohc 
bishops  who  did  not  act  in  glaring  and  ostentatious  defi- 
ance of  the  Queen's  title  to  the  Crown.  Accordingly, 
a  very  clever  artist  represented  me  in  a  caricature  as  a 
boy  who  had  chalked  up  *  No  Popery  *  upon  a  wall  and 
then  run  away.  This  was  a  very  fair  joke.  In  fact,  I 
wanted  to  place  the  assertion  of  the  Queen's  title  to 
appoint  bishops  on  the  statute-book,  and  there  leave  it. 
I  kept  in  the  hands  of  the  Crown  the  discretion  to  pros- 
ecute or  not  any  offensive  denial  of  the  Queen's  rights. 
My  purpose  was  fully  answered.  Those  who  wished  to 
give  the  Pope  the  right  of  appointing  bishops  in  England 
opposed  the  bill.  When  my  object  had  been  gained,  I 
had  no  objection  to  the  repeal  of  the  Act. 

During  my  temporary  resignation  of  office,  which  took 


LORD  PALMERSTON.  211 

place  in  the  month  of  February,  1851,  on  the  question 
of  Mr.  Locke  King's  motion  for  an  alteration  of  the 
county  franchise,  Lord  Aberdeen  and  Sir  James  Graham 
endeavored  to  persuade  me  not  to  persevere  with  the 
bill,  but  to  be  satisfied  with  Parliamentary  resolutions 
asserting  the  rights  of  the  Crown.  I  did  not  like  to 
retire  from  the  position  I  had  assumed.  But  in  sub- 
stance the  course  suggested  by  Lord  Aberdeen  would 
have  been  as  effectual  and  less  offensive  than  that  which 
I  adopted. 

A  more  serious  question  arose  with  respect  to  Lord 
Palmerston's  conduct  as  Secretary  for  Foreign  Affairs. 
Baron  Stockmar,  whose  memoirs  have  been  published, 
seems  to  have  acquiesced  in  the  opinion  that  my  conduct 
on  that  occasion  was  dilatory  and  undecided.  My  own 
judgment  upon  it  is  that  it  was  hasty  and  precipitate.  I 
ought  to  have  seen  Lord  Palmerston,  and  I  think  I 
could,  without  difficulty,  have  induced  him  to  make  a 
proper  submission  to  her  Majesty's  wishes,  and  agree  to 
act  in  conformity  with  conditions  to  which  he  had  already 
given  his  assent.  I  felt  it  to  be  my  duty  to  declare  the 
political  connection  between  Lord  Palmerston  and  my- 
self to  be  dissolved.  But  I  felt  at  the  same  time  that 
my  Government  was  so  much  weakened  that  it  was  not 
likely  to  retain  power  for  any  long  time. 

Accordingly,  I  took  the  first  opportunity  to  resign 
office.  On  February  23,  1852,  I  announced  the  resig- 
nation of  the  Ministry  in  the  House  of  Commons.  Just 
before  the  resignation.  Lord  Naas  made  a  violent  attack 
on  Lord  Clarendon,  which  I  thought  it  my  duty  to  rebut 
in  the  strongest  language.  On  a  division,  the  ayes 
were  137,  and  the  noes  229  ;  majority,  92. 

Mr.  Tierney  used  to  say,  as  the  fruit  of  his  experience, 
that  it  was  very  difficult  for  a  member  of  the  House  of 


212  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

Commons  to  attain  high  office,  but  that  it  was  still 
more  difficult  to  leave  high  office  with  credit  on  suffi- 
cient grounds.  The  latter  is,  in  fact,  the  more  difficult 
operation  of  the  two.  I  cannot  say  that  in  breaking  up 
my  own  Administration,  or  in  leaving  Lord  Aberdeen's 
Administration,  or  in  leaving  office  in  1865, 1  have  been 
satisfied  with  the  reasons  which  determined  me  to  give 
up  the  high  position  in  which  I  had  been  placed  by  my 
Sovereign. 

It  may  not  be  any  loss  to  the  reader  if  I  give,  in  the 
next  chapter,  some  observations  on  the  course  of  the 
Executive  Government  of  England  since  the  Great  Rev- 
olution of  1688. 


i  UNIVERSITY  j( 
LEADERS  IN  THE  ROVSW^^t^f^OjUkoHiS.  213 


CHAPTER  V. 

CONSTITUTION  OF   THE   HOUSE   OF   COMMONS.  —  CHOICE 
OF  LEADERS. 

Lord  Macaulay  has,  in  his  review  of  the  conduct  of 
William  Pitt,  made  a  remark  of  so  much  importance, 
coming  from  such  a  man,  that,  if  it  be  erroneous  or 
overcharged,  it  ought  not  to  be  left  without  comment. 
I  will  give  his  remarks  in  full :  — 

'  Parliamentary  government,  like  every  other  contriv- 
ance of  man,  has  its  advantages  and  its  disadvantages. 
On  the  advantages  there  is  no  need  to  dilate.  The  his- 
tory of  England  during  the  one  hundred  and  seventy 
years  which  have  elapsed  since  the  House  of  Commons 
became  the  most  powerful  body  in  the  State ;  her  im- 
mense and  still  growing  prosperity ;  her  freedom,  her 
tranquillity,  her  greatness  in  arts,  in  sciences,  and  in 
arms ;  her  maritime  ascendency,  the  marvels  of  her  pub- 
lic credit,  her  American,  her  African,  her  Australian, 
her  Asiatic  Empires,  sufficiently  prove  the  excellence  of 
her  institutions.  But  those  institutions,  though  excellent, 
are  assuredly  not  perfect.  Parliamentary  government 
is  government  by  speaking.  In  such  a  government,  the 
power  of  speaking  is  the  most  highly  prized  of  all  the 
qualities  which  a  politician  can  possess ;  and  that  power 
may  exist  in  the  highest  degree,  without  judgment, 
without  fortitude,  without  skill  in  reading  the  charac- 
ters of  men   or   the   signs  of  the  times,  without  any 


214  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

knowledge  of  the  principles  of  legislation  or  of  political 
economy,  and  without  any  skill  in  diplomacy  or  in  the 
administration  of  war.  Nay,  it  may  well  happen  that 
those  very  intellectual  qualities  which  give  a  peculiar 
charm  to  the  speeches  of  a  public  man  may  be  incom- 
patible with  the  qualities  which  would  fit  him  to  meet  a 
pressing  emergency  with  promptitude  and  firmness.  It 
was  thus  with  Charles  Townshend.  It  was  thus  with 
Windham.  It  was  a  privilege  to  listen  to  those  accom- 
plished and  ingenious  orators.  But  in  a  perilous  crisis 
they  would  have  been  found  far  inferior  in  all  the  quali- 
ties of  rulers  to  such  a  man  as  Oliver  Cromwell,  who 
talked  nonsense,  or  as  William  the  Silent,  who  did  not 
talk  at  all.  When  Parliamentary  government  is  estab- 
lished, a  Charles  Townshend  or  a  Windham  will  almost 
always  exercise  much  greater  influence  than  such  men 
as  the  great  Protector  of  England,  or  as  the  Founder 
of  the  Batavian  Commonwealth.*  ^ 

From  long  experience  in  the  House  of  Commons,  I 
think  I  am  entitled  to  say  that  in  these  remarks  Ma- 
caulay  is  greatly  mistaken.  Charles  Townshend  and 
William  Windham  were  listened  to  in  the  House  of 
Commons  with  delight  and  applause.  But  there  are 
other  qualities  which  the  House  of  Commons  more  im- 
peratively requires.  They  require  that  the  speaker  who 
assumes  to  lead  them  should  be  himself  persuaded  that 
the  course  he  recommends  will  prove  beneficial  to  the 
country.  Mr.  Windham  was  unstable  and  irresolute. 
He  said  one  day  to  Lord  Henry  Petty,  who  was  sitting 
beside  him,  towards  the  end  of  his  speech,  *  Which  way 
did  I  say  I  would  vote  ?  *  Such  a  man  can  never  lead 
the  House  of  Commons.     Lord  Castlereagh  was  a  very 

1  Macaulay's  '  Review  of  William  Pitt.* 


PARLIAMENTARY  GOVERNMENT.  215 

tiresome,  involved,  and  obscure  speaker ;  Lord  Althorp 
was  without  any  powers  of  oratory ;  yet  I  never  knew 
two  men  who  had  more  influence  in  the  House  of  Com- 
mons than  Lord  Castlereagh  and  Lord  Althorp.  There 
are  qualities  which  govern  men,  such  as  sincerity,  and 
a  conviction  on  the  part  of  the  hearers  that  the  Minister 
is  a  man  to  be  trusted,  which  have  more  to  do  with  in- 
fluence over  the  House  of  Commons  than  the  most 
brilliant  flights  of  fancy  and  the  keenest  wit. 

Macaulay  goes  on  to  say  that  'from  the  Book  of 
Dignities  a  curious  list  might  be  made  out  of  Chancel- 
lors ignorant  of  the  principles  of  equity,  and  First  Lords 
of  the  Admiralty  ignorant  of  the  principles  of  naviga- 
tion.' Yet  there  are  other  qualities  which  Lord  Spencer 
and  Lord  Melville  possessed,  such  as  decision  and  calm- 
ness in  days  of  peril,  and  power  to  enforce  their  own 
persuasion  upon  others,  which,  proceeding  from  men 
ignorant  of  the  principles  of  navigation,  have  done 
much  to  augment  the  British  Empire,  to  promote  British 
prosperity,  to  avert  danger  from  our  shores,  to  make 
our  wars  successful  and  our  treaties  honorable. 

My  grandfather.  Lord  Torrington,  told  me  that  the 
first  William  Pitt  sent  a  message  to  the  Admiralty  that 
the  Channel  fleet  must  sail  on  the  Tuesday  following. 
The  Board  of  Admiralty  answered,  that  it  was  impossi- 
ble that  the  fleet  could  be  ready  by  Tuesday.  Mr.  Pitt 
rejoined,  that  in  that  case  he  should  recommend  to  the 
King  to  name  a  new  Board  of  Admiralty.  The  Channel 
fleet  sailed  on  the  Tuesday,  and  perhaps  this  was  the 
occasion  when  a  great  victory  was  gained  on  the  coast 
of  France. 

It  would  not  be  difficult,  by  going  over  our  Parlia- 
mentary history  from  the  Revolution  of  1688  to  the 
present  time,  to  show  that  the  policy  pursued  has  nob 


216  RECOLLECTIONS  AND   SUGGESTIONS. 

been  a  policy  recommended  merely  by  flashy  or  lively 
orators,  but  one  adopted,  from  time  to  time,  wisely  or 
unwisely,  in  accordance  with  national  views,  and  aimed 
at  some  intelligible  object.  Never  did  an  expedition 
leave  the  English  shores  with  more  pomp  of  preparation, 
with  higher  expectation  of  great  achievement,  than  the 
Walcheren  expedition.  Never  was  an  expedition  worse 
commanded,  or  attended  with  more  disastrous  failure. 
Yet,  after  a  long  inquiry,  the  House  of  Commons  re- 
jected a  vote  of  censure  upon  the  Ministers  who  directed 
the  expedition.  Mr.  Elliot,  of  Wells,  told  me  that, 
according  to  his  belief,  the  House  of  Commons,  in  re- 
jecting the  censure,  rightly  interpreted  the  wishes  of 
the  country.  The  fact  I  believe  to  have  been,  that  the 
country  looked  upon  the  contest  with  France  as  a  con- 
test of  life  and  death,  and  was  ready  to  forgive  any 
error,  except  that  of  shrinking  from  the  sacrifices  re- 
quired to  prevent  Napoleon  from  being  as  much  the 
conqueror  of  England  as  he  was  the  master  of  Europe. 
Such,  then,  is  the  British  House  of  Commons.  In 
its  worst  days,  when  Addington  was  its  Prime  Minister, 
and  the  country  gentlemen  were  supposed  by  a  satirist 
to  exclaim, — 

They  think  we're  honest,  for  they  know  we're  dull,  . 

the  heart  of  Britain  was  sound,  and  Lord  llawkesbuiy 
refused,  with  becoming  pride,  to  listen  to  the  dictation 
of  the  great  tyrant. 

The  House  of  Commons  likes  a  man  who  can  be 
trusted ;  that  is  to  say,  whose  honesty  is  not  questioned, 
and  whose  common  sense  can  be  expected  to  guide  him 
at  a  moment  of  difficulty. 

A  review  of  political  affairs  from  1701  to  1800,  or 
to  the  present  day,  will  confirm  what  I  have  said. 


PARLIAMENTARY  GOVERNMENT.  217 

Lord  Macaulay  has  truly  stated  that  during  the 
reign  of  William  III.  that  wise  and  sagacious  prince 
took  the  management  of  foreign  affairs  into  his  own 
hands.  I  cannot  think,  however,  that  he  did  well  to 
ally  himself  with  Louis  XIV.,  for  the  purpose  of  regu- 
lating the  succession  to  the  Crown  of  Spain  on  the 
death  of  the  Spanish  King.  Two  consequences  were 
pretty  sure  to  follow  any  such  interference.  The  Span- 
iards would  be  indignant  at  the  interference  of  any 
foreign  power,  and  especially  of  an  heretical  power,  in 
the  disposal  of  the  dominions  united  under  the  Spanish 
Crown.  Louis  XIV.,  the  most  faithless  prince  of  his 
time,  was  sure  to  set  at  nought  his  own  solemn  promises, 
to  renounce  the  renunciation  made  upon  his  marriage, 
and  to  look  to  his  own  aggrandizement  and  that  of  his 
family  as  full  compensation  for  any  load  upon  his  con- 
science which  he  might  incur  by  perjury.  Accordingly 
these  two  consequences  flowed  as  necessary  results  from 
the  treaties  made  by  William.  With  respect  to  domes- 
tic affairs,  William  endeavored  to  unite  in  one  Council 
the  best  and  cleverest  statesmen  of  his  day.  His  own 
preference  was  given  to  the  Tories ;  but  when  he  told 
one  of  his  confidential  servants  that  he  thought  the 
Tories  were  more  friendly  to  the  royal  prerogative 
than  the  Whigs,  that  statesman  quickly  answered, 
'  Yes,  but  your  Majesty  is  not  King  of  the  Tories.'  At 
the  end  of  his  reign,  the  anger  of  the  British  nation 
against  the  French  King,  who,  on  the  death  of  James 
II.,  had  presumed  to  dispose  of  the  Crown  of  England, 
united  all  parties  in  the  King's  favor. 

The  mind  of  Queen  Anne  was  for  a  long  time  abso- 
lutely directed  by  Marlborough  and  Godolphin  ;  but 
when  the  EXuchess  of  Marlborough,  from  partiality  to 
the  Whigs  and  regard  for  her  son-in-law,  Sunderland, 


218  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

had  given  a  preponderance  to  the  Whigs  in  the  Cabinet, 
the  Tory  prejudices  of  the  Queen  made  her  revolt 
against  this  predominance,  and  by  skilful  intrigues  Lord 
Bolingbroke,  Harley,  and  Mrs.  Masham  obtained  com- 
plete power  over  the  domestic  and  foreign  policy  of 
Great  Britain.  Yet  this  superiority  did  not  rest  upon 
any  secure  foundation.  Harley  was  a  skilful  manager 
of  Parliamentary  interests,  and  St.  John  an  eloquent 
orator,  always  able  to  command  the  cheers  of  his  sup- 
porters ;  but  they  were  bitterly  hostile  to  each  other. 
Harley  wished  to  support  the  Protestant  succession,  St. 
John  to  pave  the  way  for  a  Popish  Pretender.  Harley 
aspired  to  an  earldom,  Bolingbroke  could  not  be  content 
with  a  less  dignity.  Queen  Anne  thought  to  finish  the 
strife  by  making  Bolingbroke  Lord  High  Treasurer  in 
the  place  of  Harley  ;  but  in  the  very  agony  of  the  con- 
test. Queen  Anne  died,  and  in  place  of  a  war  of  suc- 
cession England  fell  into  the  hands  of  the  Whigs,  and 
welcomed,  amid  the  joy  of  the  Dissenters,  a  German 
Elector,  as  King  of  Great  Britain.  The  Church  recon- 
ciled itself  to  a  Protestant  prince,  and  the  Dissenters 
readily  promised  to  support  the  Church,  as  a  barrier 
against  a  Jacobite  revolution. 

Lord  Oxford  and  Lord  Bolingbroke  had  quarrelled 
whether  one  or  both  should  be  Earls  ;  but  Robert  Wal- 
pole,  a  country  gentleman  of  Norfolk,  had  the  sagacity 
to  perceive  that  the  rule  of  Great  Britain  was  about  to 
pass  from  the  House  of  Lords  to  the  House  of  Com- 
mons. He  refused  the  title  of  Earl  and  the  white  staff 
of  Lord  High  Treasurer.  As  First  Lord  of  the  Treas- 
ury in  the  House  of  Commons,  he  ruled  England  for 
more  than  twenty  years ;  and  when  at  last  he  retired 
to  the  House  of  Lords  he  said  to  Pulteney,  who  hdd 
accepted  the  title  of  Earl  of  Bath,  *  You  and  I,  my 


PARLIAMENTARY  GOVERNMENT.  219 

Lord,  are  now  two  of  the  most  insignificant  fellows  in 
England.' 

The  next  great  leader  of  the  House  of  Commons 
was  William  Pitt,  like  Walpole  and  like  Churchill, 
a  member  of  a  country  gentleman's  family.  William 
Pitt,  unlike  Henry  Fox,  who  regarded  money  more 
than  power,  was  bold,  disinterested,  and  lofty  in  his 
aims.  He  said  of  his  chief,  the  Duke  of  Newcastle, 
'  The  Duke  of  Newcastle  lent  me  his  majority  to  carry 
on  the  Government.'  He  commanded  his  expeditions 
against  France  by  placing  a  sheet  of  paper  over  the 
orders  he  gave,  and  leaving  at  the  bottom  of  the  page 
on  which  they  were  written  only  room  for  the  signa- 
tures of  the  Lords  of  the  Admiralty.  In  contradiction 
to  his  former  declamations  against  Hanover,  he  gave 
large  subsidies  to  Frederick  of  Prussia  ;  and  when  he 
got  possession  of  Canada  said,  '  I  have  conquered 
America  in  Germany.' 

When  Lord  Chatham  disappeared,  the  Tories  ob- 
tained a  majority  in  the  Cabinet.  They  lost  America  ; 
and,  under  the  guidance  of  William  Pitt  the  younger, 
fought  against  frenzy  embodied  in  the  democracy  of 
France.  By  playing  on  the  fears  of  England  they  were 
enabled  to  make  gigantic  efforts,  and  to  raise  her  debt 
from  one  hundred  and  thirty  millions  to  eight  hundred 
millions.  The  two  athletes  who  contended  on  the  floor 
of  the  House  of  Commons  were  Pitt  and  Fox.  Pitt, 
like  his  father,  had  the  power  of  commanding  men  ; 
his  ruinous  policy  did  not  prevent  his  obtaining  in  the 
House  of  Commons  attached  friends,  unbounded  ad- 
miration, and  a  majority  of  two-thirds  of  the  represent- 
atives of  the  people. 

Fox  was  a  great  speaker,  and,  in  the  words  of  Burke, 
the  greatest  debater  the  world  ever  saw.     Not  place  or 


220  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

power,  but  reputation  as  an  orator,  was  the  object  of 
his  ambition,  as  he  declares  in  one  of  his  earliest  let- 
ters to  an  intimate  friend  and  relation.  He  inspired 
affection  rather  than  admiration.  In  his  worst  days  an 
observer  said  of  his  party,  '  There  are  only  forty  of 
them,  but  every  one  of  them  is  ready  to  be  hanged  for 
Fox.'  In  his  earlier  days.  Lord  Mansfield  being  asked 
who  that  young  man  was  whom  he  saw  in  Westminster 
Hall,  answered,  '  That  is  the  son  of  old  Harry  Fox, 
with  twice  his  parts  and  half  his  sagacity.' 

These  two  men,  Charles  Fox  and  William  Pitt,  set 
a  proper  value  upon  each  other's  great  abilities.  Pitt 
said  of  Fox,  '  Whenever  I  have  made  a  better  speech 
than  usual,  I  observe  that  Fox  in  his  reply  surpasses 
himself.'  Of  Pitt's  great  speech  on  the  renewal  of  the 
war  with  France,  Fox  remarked  that  he  had  spoken 
with  an  eloquence  which  Demosthenes  would  have  ad- 
mired, perhaps  have  envied. 

The  errors  of  Fox  —  his  coalition  with  Lord  North, 
and  his  India  Bill — were  grave;  but  the  warmth  of 
his  feelings  and  his  passionate  love  of  liberty  should 
obtain  for  his  memory  indemnity  for  these  or  even 
greater  faults.  His  affectionate  temper,  combined  with 
his  love  of  liberty,  won  him  the  attachment  of  devoted 
friends.  His  memory  ought  to  be  consecrated  in  the 
heart  of  every  lover  of  freedom  throughout  the  globe. 

I  think  I  have  shown  that  the  faculty  of  leading  the 
House  of  Commons  does  not  consist  merely  in  making 
flashy  speeches,  but  is  founded  upon  qualities  which 
entitle  men  to  obtain  as  followers  a  majority  in  the 
noblest  assembly  of  fieemen  in  the  world. 


ORIGIN  OF  THE  CRIMEAN  WAR.  221 


CHAPTER  VI. 

MINISTRY  OF   LORD  ABERDEEN.  —  ORIGIN  OF    THE 
CRIMEAN    WAR. 

I  THINK  I  have  said  in  a  former  chapter  that  I  com- 
mitted an  error  in  resigning  my  office  under  Lord 
Aberdeen  at  the  time  and  in  the  manner  in  which  I 
did  it. 

But  I  had,  in  fact,  committed  a  much  greater  error 
in  consenting  to  serve  under  Lord  Aberdeen  as  Prime 
Minister.  I  had  served  under  Lord  Grey  and  Lord 
Melbourne  before  I  became  Prime  Minister,  and  I 
served  under  Lord  Palmerston  after  I  had  been  Prime 
Minister.  In  no  one  of  these  cases  did  I  find  any 
difficulty  in  allying  subordination  with  due  counsel 
and  co-operation.  But,  as  it  is  proverbially  said, 
'  Where  there  is  a  will,  there  is  a  way,'  so  in  political 
affairs  the  converse  is  true,  '  Where  there  is  no  will, 
there  is  no  way.' 

As  an  instance  of  failure,  I  may  mention  that  Lord 
Aberdeen  earnestly  wished  to  preserve  peace  between 
Russia  and  Turkey.  I  had  pointed  out  a  way  in  which 
this  might  be  done.  The  Austrian  Government  had 
framed  a  note  of  conciliation,  which  the  Emperor  of 
Russia  had  accepted  as  a  settlement  of  all  difficulties. 
I  proposed  to  Lord  Clarendon  that  the  Turkish  Gov- 
ernment should  be  told  that,  if  they  would  accept  this 
note,  totidem  verbis,  we  could  arrange  a  peace  between 


222  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

Turkey  and  Russia ;  but  that  if  Turkey  altered  the 
note,  we  could  not  befriend  her  any  further.  Lord 
Aberdeen,  although  he  saw  very  clearly  that  by  this 
means  peace  would  be  insured,  declined  to  use  his 
authority  to  enforce  the  condition.  Lord  Clarendon 
recommended  the  Austrian  note,  but  not  in  such  a 
manner  as  to  oblige  Turkey  to  accept  it,  totidem  verbis. 
Lord  Stratford  de  Redcliffe  failed  in  persuading  the 
Turkish  Ministers  to  accept  the  Austrian  note.  Alter- 
ations were  made  with  a  view  to  make  it  more  pala- 
table to  the  Oriental  taste.  But  the  Emperor  of  Russia, 
in  his  turn,  was  peremptory.  In  his  turn  he  was  un- 
reasonable. He  declared  the  alterations  were  made 
by  the  Padishah,  a  name  he  was  wont  to  apply  to  Lord 
Stratford  de  Redcliffe.  He  refused  the  amended  note, 
and  war  was  the  consequence. 

Had  I  been  Prime  Minister  at  that  time,  I  should 
have  insisted  on  the  acceptance  of  the  Austrian  note. 
I  may  add  that  had  war  then  been  averted,  the  Reform 
Bill  of  1854,  to  which  Sir  James  Graham  had  most 
willingly,  and  Lord  Palmerston  most  reluctantly,  as- 
sented, would  in  all  probability  have  passed  through 
Parliament  recommended  by  Lord  Aberdeen  and  his 
Cabinet.  The  franchise  would  have  been  given  to  5/. 
householders ;  several  boroughs  which  now  return  mem- 
bers would  have  been  disfranchised.  The  gang  who 
many  years  later  skulked  in  the  Cave  of  AduUam  would 
never  have  existed,  and  the  Reform  Act  would  have 
been^completed  by  its  original  promoters. 

Thus  has  the  course  of  history  been  changed  by  my 
weakness  — 

,  Ambition  should  be  made  of  sterner  stuff. 

Lord  Aberdeen  always  told  me  that,  after  being  Prime 


CRIMEAN  WAR.  223 

Minister  for  a  short  time,  he  meant  to  make  way  for 
me,  and  give  up  the  post.  But  somehow  the  moment 
never  came  for  executing  his  intentions. 

When  I  had  accepted  the  mission  to  Vienna,  with  the 
hope  of  making  peace,  I  found  that  neither  my  proposal 
for  reducing  the  Russian  fleet  to  three  sail  of  the  line, 
nor  the  French  and  British  proposal  for  neutralizing  the 
Black  Sea,  would  be  accepted  by  Russia.  The  Emperor 
of  Austria  wished  to  limit  the  Russian  fleet  to  its  for- 
mer number.  When  I  was  about  to  depart  from  Vienna, 
the  Austrian  Minister  of  Foreign  Affiiirs  asked  me  to 
recommend  the  proposals  of  his  Court  to  the  British 
Ministers.  I  said  I  would  advise  Lord  Palmerston  and 
Lord  Clarendon  to  continue  the  negotiations  with  Aus- 
tria, but  that  neither  Lord  Palmerston  nor  Lord  Claren- 
don would  accept  the  proposals  which  he  had  mentioned 
to  me. 

I  found,  accordingly,  that  those  proposals  were  re- 
jected at  home ;  and,  as  soon  as  they  were  rejected,  I 
declared  myself  ready  to  continue  the  war,  in  conformity 
with  the  views  of  Lord  Palmerston  and  Lord  Clarendon. 
My  notion  was,  that  if  the  British  Ministers  had  listened 
to  the  Austrian  overtures,  they  might  have  replied  that 
they  could  not  agree  to  such  terms ;  but  that  if  Russia 
would  make  further  concessions,  Great  Britain,  with  the 
agreement  of  France,  would  make  peace  on  fair  terms. 

Had  m}^  plans  prospered,  the  treaty  of  1856,  stipulat- 
ing a  reduction  to  three  sail  of  the  line,  instead  of  a 
neutralization  of  the  Black  Sea,  would  probably  have 
been  accepted  by  Russia. 

It  is  always  a  mistake  to  impose  upon  a  great  power 
conditions  inconsistent  with  its  sense  of  honor.  The 
title  of  King  of  France,  assumed  by  the  English  kings, 
was  given  up  at  the  Peace  of  Amiens ;  and  the  articles 


224  PvECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

relative  to  the  demolition  of  Dunkirk  added  nothing  to 
the  security  of  England,  however  much  they  may  have* 
offended  the  pride  of  France. 

The  conduct  of  Lord  Granville,  in  consenting  to  re- 
nounce the  article  of  the  treaty  of  1856  relating  to  the 
Black  Sea,  has  been  much  blamed ;  but  it  was  notorious 
that  none  of  the  Great  Powers  were  inclined  to  insist 
upon  the  retention  of  that  part  of  the  treaty.  Had 
England  insisted  upon  going  to  war  to  maintain  the 
neutralization  of  the  Black  Sea,  she  would  have  gone  to 
war  Avithout  allies,  and  even  Turkey  would  have  in- 
sisted upon  a  large  loan  from  the  United  Kingdom  to 
enable  her  to  sustain  the  expenses  of  war.  Lord  Palmer- 
ston  himself  did  not  expect  that  the  treaty  of  1856 
would  last  fourteen  years,  which  was  the  actual  time  of 
its  duration.  He  was  anxious  to  press  upon  Turkey  the 
reform  of  her  finances,  and  an  honest  administration  of 
justice,  which  I  had  constantly  urged  in  my  dispatches ; 
and  he  did  not  disguise  his  opinion  that  Great  Britain 
could  not  go  to  war  to  defend  a  dead  carcase. 

The  present  state  of  affairs  portends  further  changes. 
Servia  and  Roumania  have  nearly  emancipated  them- 
selves from  the  Turkish  yoke.  In  European  Turkey, 
the  population  of  the  Christians  increases  far  more 
rapidly  than  that  of  the  Turkish  subjects  of  the  Sultan ; 
so  that,  before  the  end  of  the  century,  Constantinoj)le, 
Adrianople,  and  Bosnia  will  probably  constitute  the 
whole  of  the  Turkish  Empire  in  Europe;  while  the 
King  of  Greece,  the  Prince  of  Servia,  with  Belgrade 
for  his  capital,  and  the  Prince  of  Roumania,  with  his 
relation  the  Emperor  of  Germany  for  his  ally,  will  be 
the  Christian  Sovereigns  of  European  Turkey. 

Our  only  interest  in  this  matter  is  to  see  that  the 
,  Emperor  of  Russia  observes  the  remaining  articles  of 


CRIMEAN  WAR.  225 

the  treaty  of  1856,  and  that  the  interests  of  trade  are 
not  injured  by  new  treaties  of  commerce  imposing  heavy 
duties  on  the  import  of  British  goods  at  Constantinople 
and  other  parts  of  the  Turkish  provinces. 


16 


226      RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 


CHAPTER  VII. 

FOREIGN  POLICY  FROM    1859    TO  THE  DEATH   OF  LORD 
PAI^MERSTON. 

I  HAVE,  in  the  Introduction  to  my  Speeches  and  De- 
spatches, marked  '  Introduction  II.,'  in  the  second 
volume,  given  an  account  of  the  general  course  of 
foreign  policy  conducted  by  me,  under  the  auspices  of 
Lord  Palmerston,  from  1859  till  the  death  of  Lord 
Palraerston,  which  occurred  in  October,  1865.  I  have 
only  a  few  remarks  to  add  to  the  summary  of  foreign 
affairs  there  given. 

When  we  first  heard  of  the  seizure  of  the  two  Con- 
federate Commissioners  on  board  the  '  Trent,'  Lord 
Palmerston  asked  me  privately  what  we  should  do.  I 
answered  shortly,  quoting  what  Grattan  said,  with 
reference  to  another  power,  and  on  another  occasion, 
*  The  United  States  Government  are  very  dangerous 
people  to  run  away  from.'  Lord  Palmerston  immedi- 
ately proposed  to  the  Cabinet  to  refer  to  the  Law  Offi- 
cers of  the  Crown  the  question  of  the  seizure  of  the 
two  Commissioners  which  had  taken  place  on  board 
the  '  Trent.'  The  Law  Officers  gave  their  opinion  that 
the  seizure  was  not  justified  by  the  law  of  nations.  Lord 
Palmerston  ordered  such  naval  and  military  preparations 
as  he  thought  urgent.  The  result  I  have  stated  in 
Introduction  II.  in  the  following  terms :  '  The  British 
Government  were  far  from  pressing  hard  on  the  United 


FOREIGN  POLICY  FROM  1860  TO  1866.  227' 

States,  and,  in  spite  of  remonstrances  from  Lord  Grey, 
Lord  Clanricarde,  Mr.  Gregory,  and  others,  put  no 
impediment  in  the  way  of  the  capture  of  British  mer- 
chant-ships, and  placed  full  reliance  on  the  courts  of 
America  for  redress  in  cases  of  wrongful  capture  by 
American  ships  of  war.  But  when  British  honor  was 
clearly  assailed,  as  in  the  case  of  the  Commissioners 
who  were  passengers  in  the  "  Trent,"  reparation  was 
promptly  demanded,  and  honorably  granted.  If  some 
delay  occurred  in  giving  that  reparation,  it  must  be 
attributed  to  the  anxiety  which  President  Lincoln  and 
Secretary  Seward  naturally  felt  to  allay  American  in- 
dignation before  they  fulfilled  what  they  felt  to  be  an 
imperative  international  obligation.' ^  It.may  be  said  ^^rry, 
further,  that  after  this  reparation  had  been  granted —  "^'  ' 
honorably  demanded,  and  honorably  granted — the  rela- 
tions of  the  two  nations,  the  United  Kingdom  and  the 
United  States,  were  more  cordial  and  more  friendly  than 
they  had  previously  been.  I  state  this  fact  on  the 
authority  of  Lord  Lyons,  at  that  time  Minister  for  Great 
Britain  at  Washington. 

I  have  further  to  state,  that  when  Mr.  Mason,  one  of 
the  two  Confederate  Commissioners,  came  to  England, 
I  received  him  in  my  own  house.  He  at  once  declared 
that  the  object  of  his  mission  was  to  ask  for  the  recog- 
nition of  the  Southern  Confederate  States  as  an  inde- 
pendent power.  I  told  him  for  answer,  that  if  the 
military  operations  of  the  Southern  States  had  been 
attended  with  great  success  ;  if  their  victories  had  been 
brilliant  and  decisive ;  and  if  the  powers  of  Europe  were 
generally  disposed  to  acknowledge  that  they  had  fairly 
acquired    the   position   of  an  independent  power,  the 

1  *  Speeches  and  Despatches,'  vol.  ii.  p.  249. 


228  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

British  Government  might  fairly  be  asked  for  recogni- 
tion. But  none  of  these  facts  were  proved,  and  there 
was  no  case  to  justify  the  British  Government  in  ac- 
ceding to  the  proposal  he  had  made. 

Mr.  Mason  answered  me  that  the  Government  of 
England  was  a  wise  Government,  and  that  he  would 
not  press  his  proposition  any  further.  I  shall  later  have 
some  comments  to  make  on  the  subsequent  negotiations 
between  the  Cabinet  of  Mr.  Gladstone  and  the  Cabinet 
of  President  Grant. 

I  have  stated  in  the  former  Introduction  that  there 
were  two  grounds  on  which  I  declined  to  submit  the 
question  of  the  '  Alabama '  to  arbitration  by  a  foreign 
power :  '  It  appeared  to  me  that  we  could  not,  consist- 
ently with  our  position  as  an  independent  state,  allow 
a  foreign  power  or  state  to  decide  either  that  Great 
Britain  had  been  wanting  in  good  faith,  or  that  our  own 
Law  Officers  did  not  understand  so  well  as  a  foreign 
power  or  state  the  meaning  of  a  British  statute.*  ^  If 
Mr.  Adams,  in  his  answer  to  me,  had  stated  that  the 
American  Government  neither  wished  to  call  in  question 
the  good  faith  of  Great  Britain,  nor  to  deny  that  our 
own  Law  Officers  were  the  best  authorities  to  decide  the 
meaning  of  a  British  statute  ;  if,  I  say,  Mr.  Adams,  who 
is  a  man  of  high  honor  and  unblemished  character,  had 
given  me  these  assurances,  I  should  at  once  have  agreed 
to  arbitration  ;  but  Mr.  Adams  knew  perfectly  well  that 
he  could  give  me  no  such  assurances.  In  fact,  Mr. 
Fish,  who  succeeded  Mr.  Seward  as  Secretary  of  State, 
did  not  scruple  to  allege  that  Lord  Palmerston  and  I, 
the  Prime  Minister  and  Secretary  of  State,  Sir  Roun- 
dell  Palmer  and  the  Law  Officers  of  the  Crown,  Sir 

*  '  Speeches  and  Despatches/  vol.  ii.  p.  269. 


ITALY.  229 

Tliomas  Fre mantle,  and  the  Commissioners  of  Customs, 
were  all  guilty  of  falsehood  and  h^^pocrisy.  But  I  must 
reserve  this  matter  for  a  future  chapter. 

In  a  former  volume  I  related  the  course  which  Lord 
Palmerston's  Cabinet  had  pursued  in  reference  to  the 
contest  which  was  carried  on  for  some  years  with  a  view 
to  establish  the  union,  the  independence,  and  the  free- 
dom of  Italy.  In  a  dispatch  of  October  27,  1860,  I 
evinced  the  sj^mpathy  which  the  British  Government 
felt  towards  the  people  of  Italy,  and  confirmed,  by  the 
authority  of  Vattel,  the  maxim,  '  That  when  a  people 
from  good  reasons  take  up  arms  against  an  oppressor, 
it  is  but  an  act  of  justice  and  generosity  to  assist  brave 
men  in  the  defence  of  their  liberties.'  But  I  will  here 
give  the  entire  dispatch  :  — 

Lord  J,  Russell  to  Sir  J.  Hudson. 

'Foreign  Office,  October  27,  1860. 

*  Sir,  —  It  appears  that  the  late  proceedings  of  the 
King  of  Sardinia  have  been  strongly  disapproved  of  by 
several  of  the  principal  Courts  of  Europe.  The  Em- 
peror of  the  French,  on  hearing  of  the  invasion  of  the 
Papal  States  by  the  army  of  General  Cialdini,  withdrew 
his  Minister  from  Turin,  expressing  at  the  same  time 
the  opinion  of  the  Imperial  Government  in  condemna- 
tion of  the  invasion  of  the  Roman  territory. 

'  The  Emperor  of  Russia  has,  we  are  told,  declared 
in  strong  terms  his  indignation  at  the  entrance  of  the 
army  of  the  King  of  Sardinia  into  the  Neapolitan  terri- 
tory, and  has  withdrawn  his  entire  mission  from  Turin. 

'  The  Prince  Regent  of  Prussia  has  also  thought  it 
necessary  to  convey  to  Sardinia  a  sense  of  his  dis- 
pleasure ;  but  he  has  not  thought  it  necessary  to  remove 
the  Prussian  Minister  from  Turin. 


230  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

'After  these  diplomatic  acts,  it  would  scarcely  be 
just  to  Italy,  or  respectful  to  the  other  Great  Powers 
of  Europe,  were  the  Government  of  Her  Majesty  any 
longer  to  withhold  the  expression  of  their  opinions. 

*  In  so  doing,  however,  Her  Majesty's  Government 
have  no  intention  to  raise  a  dispute  upon  the  reasons 
which  have  been  given,  in  the  name  of  the  King  of 
Sardinia,  for  the  invasion  of  the  Roman  and  Neapolitan 
States.  Whether  or  no  the  Pope  was  justified  in  de- 
fending his  authority  by  means  of  foreign  levies; 
whether  the  King  of  the  Two  Sicilies,  while  still  main- 
taining his  flag  at  Capua  and  Gaeta,  can  be  said  to 
have  abdicated — are  not  the  arguments  upon  which 
Her  Majesty's  Government  propose  to  dilate. 

'  The  large  questions  which  appear  to  them  to  be  at 
issue  are  these :  Were  the  people  of  Italy  justified  in 
asking  the  assistance  of  the  King  of  Sardinia  to  relieve 
them  from  governments  with  which  they  are  discon- 
tented, and  was  the  King  of  Sardinia  justified  in  fur- 
nishing the  assistance  of  his  arms  to  the  people  of  the 
Roman  and  Neapolitan  States  ? 

*  There  appear  to  have  been  two  motives  which  have 
induced  the  people  of  the  Roman  and  Neapolitan  States 
to  have  joined  willingly  in  the  subversion  of  their  gov- 
ernments. The  first  of  these  was,  that  the  govern- 
ments of  the  Pope  and  the  King  of  the  Two  Sicilies 
provided  so  ill  for  the  administration  of  justice,  the 
protection  of  personal  liberty,  and  the  general  welfare 
of  their  people,  that  their  subjects  looked  forward  to 
the  overthrow  of  their  rulers  as  a  necessary  prelimi- 
nary to  all  improvements  in  their  condition. 

'  The  second  motive  was,  that  a  conviction  had  spread 
since  the  year  1849,  that  the  only  manner  in  which 
Italians   could   secure   their   independence    of    foreign 


ITALY. 


231 


control  was  by  forming  one  strong  government  for  the 
whole  of  Italy. 

'  The  struggle  of  Charles  Albert  in  1848,  and  the 
sympathy  which  the  present  King  of  Sardinia  has  shown 
for  the  Italian  cause,  have  naturally  caused  the  associa- 
tion of  the  name  of  Victor  Emmanuel  with  the  single 
authority  under  which  the  Italians  aspire  to  live. 

'  Looking  at  the  question  in  this  view,  Her  Majesty's 
Government  must  admit  that  the  Italians  themselves 
are  the  best  judges  of  their  own  interests. 

'  That  eminent  jurist,  Vattel,  when  discussing  the 
lawfulness  of  the  assistance  given  by  the  United  Prov- 
inces to  the  Prince  of  Orange  when  he  invaded  Eng- 
land, and  overturned  the  throne  of  James  II.,  says: 
"  The  authority  of  the  Prince  of  Orange  had  doubtless 
an  influence  on  the  deliberation  of  the  States-General, 
but  it  did  not  lead  them  to  the  commission  of  an  act  of 
injustice  ;  for  when  a  people  from  good  reasons  take  up 
arms  against  an  oppressor,  it  is  bat  an  act  of  justice  and 
generosity  to  assist  brave  men  in  the  defence  of  their 
liberties.'* 

'  Therefore,  according  to  Vattel,  the  question  resolves 
itself  into  this :  Did  the  people  of  Naples  and  of  the 
Roman  States  take  up  arms  against  their  governments 
for  good  reasons  ? 

'  Upon  this  grave  matter  Her  Majesty's  Government 
hold  that  the  people  in  question  are  themselves  the  best 
judges  of  their  own  affairs.  Her  Majesty's  Govern- 
ment do  not  feel  justified  in  declaring  that  the  people 
of  Southern  Italy  had  not  good  reasons  for  throwing 
off  their  allegiance  to  their  former  governments ;  Her 
Majesty's  Government  cannot,  therefore,  pretend  to 
blame  the  King  of  Sardinia  for  assisting  them.  There 
remains,  however,  a  question  of  fact.     It  is  asserted  by 


232  KECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

the  partisans  of  the  fallen  goveraments  that  the  people 
of  the  Roman  States  were  attached  to  the  Pope,  and 
the  people  of  the  kingdom  of  Naples  to  the  dynasty 
of  Francis  II.,  but  that  Sardinian  agents  and  foreign 
adventurers  have  by  force  and  intrigue  subverted  the 
thrones  of  those  sovereigns.  It  is  difficult,  however, 
to  believe,  after  the  astonishing  events  that  have  been 
seen,  that  the  Pope  and  the  King  of  the  Two  Sicilies 
possessed  the  love  of  their  people.  How  was  it,  one 
must  ask,  that  the  Pope  found  it  impossible  to  levy  a 
Roman  army,  and  that  he  was  forced  to  rely  almost 
entirely  upon  foreign  mercenaries  ?  How  did  it  happen, 
again,  that  Garibaldi  conquered  nearly  all  Sicily  with 
two  thousand  men,  and  marched  from  Reggio  to  Naples 
with  five  thousand  ?  How  but  from  the  universal  dis- 
affection of  the  people  of  the  Two  Sicilies  ? 

*  Neither  can  it  be  said  that  this  testimony  of  the 
popular  will  was  capricious  or  causeless.  Forty  years 
ago  the  Neapolitan  people  made  an  attempt  regularly 
and  temperately  to  reform  their  government  under  the 
reigning  dynasty.  The  Powers  of  Europe,  assembled 
at  Laybach,  resolved,  with  the  exception  of  England,  to 
put  down  this  attempt  by  force.  It  was  put  down,  and 
a  large  foreign  army  of  occupation  was  left  in  the  Two 
Sicilies  to  maintain  social  order.  In  1848,  the  Neapol- 
itan people  again  attempted  to  secure  liberty  under  the 
Bourbon  dynasty,  but  their  best  patriots  atoned,  by  an 
imprisonment  of  ten  years,  for  the  offence  of  endeavor- 
ing to  free  their  country.  What  wonder,  then,  that  in 
1860  the  Neapolitan  mistrust  and  resentment  should 
throw  off  the  Bourbons,  as  in  1688  England  had  thrown 
off  the  Stuarts? 

*  It  must  be  admitted,  undoubtedly,  that  the  severance 
of  the  ties  which  bind  together  a  sovereign  and  his  sub- 


ITALY.  233 

jects  is  in  itself  a  misfortune.  Notions  of  allegiance 
become  confused;  the  succession  to  the  throne  is  dis- 
puted ;  adverse  parties  threaten  the  peace  of  society ; 
rights  and  pretensions  are  opposed  to  each  other,  and 
mar  the  harmony  of  the  state.  Yet  it  must  be  acknowl- 
edged, on  the  other  hand,  that  the  Italian  revolution 
has  been  conducted  with  singular  temper  and  forbear- 
ance. The  subversion  of  existing  power  has  not  been 
foUow^ed,  as  is  too  often  the  case,  by  an  outburst  of 
popular  vengeance.  The  extreme  views  of  democrats 
have  nowhere  prevailed.  Public  opinion  has  checked 
the  excesses  of  the  public  triumph.  The  venerated 
forms  of  constitutional  monarchy  have  been  associated 
with  the  name  of  a  prince  who  represents  an  ancient 
and  glorious  dynasty.  Such  have  been  the  causes  and 
concomitant  circumstances  of  the  revolution  of  Italy. 
Her  Majesty's  Government  can  see  no  sufficient  ground 
for  the  severe  censure  with  which  Austria,  France, 
Prussia,  and  Russia  have  visited  the  acts  of  the  King  of 
Sardinia.  Her  Majesty's  Government  will  turn  their 
eyes  rather  to  the  gratifying  prospect  of  a  people  build- 
ing up  the  edifice  of  their  liberties,  and  consolidating 
the  work  of  their  independence,  amid  the  sympathies 
and  good  wishes  of  Europe. 
'I  am,  &c., 

'  (Signed)  J.  Russell. 

*  P.  S.  —  You  are  at  liberty  to  give  a  copy  of  this  dis- 
patch to  Count  Cavour.' 

It  was  in  acknowledgment  of  this  dispatch  that  I  w^as 
presented,  by  the  generous  kindness  of  some  Milanese 
gentlemen,  with  a  gift  for  which  I  am  proud  here  to 
record  my  gratitude,  —  a  beautiful  marble   statue  by 


234  KECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

Carlo  Romano,  representing  young  Italy  ;  she  holds  in 
her  hands  a  diadem  embossed  with  the  arms  of  the 
various  Italian  States,  thenceforward  to  be  one.  This 
statue  has  ever  since  adorned  my  study. 

In  the  same  spirit  I  rejected,  with  the  assent  of  Lord 
Palmerston  and  the  Cabinet,  and  with  the  sanction  of 
the  Queen,  a  proposal  of  the  French  Government  that 
the  British  navy  should  concur  with  that  of  France  in 
preventing  the  passage  of  Garibaldi  from  Sicily  to  the 
mainland  of  Italy.  On  March  30, 1861,  I  wrote  the  fol- 
lowing dispatch  to  the  Marquis  d'Azeglio :  — 

*  Foreign  Office,  March  80,  1861. 

*  M.  Le  MarqiUis,  —  I  have  had  the  honor  to  receive 
your  letter  of  the  19th  inst.,  informing  me  that  the 
National  Parliament  has  voted,  and  the  King,  your 
august  Sovereign,  has  sanctioned,  a  law  by  virtue  of 
which  His  Majesty  Victor  Emmanuel  II.  assumes,  for 
himself  and  for  his  successors,  the  title  of  "  King  of 
Italy." 

'  Having  laid  your  communication  before  Her  Majesty 
the  Queen,  I  am  commanded  to  state  to  you  that  Her 
Majesty,  acting  on  the  principle  of  respecting  the  inde- 
pendence of  the  nations  of  Europe,  will  receive  you  as 
the  Envoy  of  Victor  Emmanuel  H.,  King  of  Italy. 

*  Corresponding  instructions  will  be  given  to  Sir 
James  Hudson,  Her  Majesty's  Envoy  Extraordinary  at 
the  Court  of  Turin. 

*  I  request  you,  M.  le  Marquis,  to  accept  the  assur- 
ances of  my  highest  consideration. 

*  I  have,  (fee, 

*  (Signed)  J.  Russell.' 

I  am  happy  to  say  that  my  dispatch  of  October  27, 


NEUTRALITY  IN  AMERICAN  CIVIL  WAR.  235 

1860,  was  warmly  approved  by  Count  Gavour  and  Gen- 
eral Garibaldi,  who,  with  the  magnanimity  of  great  men, 
instead  of  attributing  to  themselves  the  whole  merit  of 
rescuing  Italy  from  her  centuries  of  servitude  and 
depression,  and  securing  to  her  the  blessings  of  indepen- 
dence and  freedom,  were  ever  willing  to  acknowledge 
with  gratitude  the  efforts  made  by  British  statesmen  to 
help  on  the  good  work. 

The  American  Civil  War  was  a  calamitous  event. 
Lord  Campbell,  then  Lord  Chancellor,  was  of  opinion 
that  the  Government  could  not  do  otherwise  than  rec- 
ognize the  belligerent  rights  of  the  Southern  States, 
important  as  they  were,  both  in  regard  to  the  number 
of  States,  the  extent  of  their  commerce,  and  the  popula- 
tion arrayed  against  the  central  Government. 

We,  therefore,  proclaimed  neutrality  as  the  policy  wel 
ought  to  pursue.  In  a  single  instance,  that  of  the  escape 
of  the  '  Alabama,'  we  fell  into  error.  I  thought  it  my 
duty  to  wait  for  the  report  of  the  Law  Officers  of  the 
Crown ;  but  I  ought  to  have  been  satisfied  with  the 
opinion  of  Sir  Kobert  Collier,  and  to  have  given  orders 
to  detain  the  '  Alabama  '  at  Birkenhead. 

When  another  ship  was  constructed  with  a  view  to 
break  the  blockade  of  the  American  navy,  I  gave  orders 
to  detain  it.  I  should  have  ordered  the  prosecution  of 
the  owners  of  the  vessel,  had  not  the  principal  Law  Offi- 
cer of  the  Crown  given  me  reason  to  think  that  it  would 
fail  in  an  English  court  of  justice.  I,  therefore,  obtained 
the  sanction  of  the  Cabinet  to  purchase  the  two  '  rams,' . 
as  they  were  called,  which  were  intended  for  hostile  I 
purposes  against  the  United  States. 

With  regard  to  the  good  faith  with  which  our  neutral- 
ity was  observed,  I  refer  to  the  opinion  of  Mr.  Grote, 
who  was  not  unduly  partial  to  the  English  Government, 


236  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

and  whose  testimony  I  believe  to  be  founded  in  truth 
and  justice.  Writing  to  Sir  George  Lewis,  December 
29,  1862,  he  says :  — 

*  The  perfect  neutrality  of  England  in  this  destruc- 
tive civil  war  now  raging  in  America  appears  to  me 
almost  a  phenomenon  in  political  history. 

'No  such  forbearance  has  been  shown  during  the 
political  history  of  the  last  two  centuries.  It  is  the 
single  case  in  which  the  English  Government  and 
public,  generally  so  over-meddlesome,  have  displayed 
some  prudent  and  commendable  forbearance,  in  spite 
of  great  temptations  to  the  contrary.  And  the  way  in 
which  the  Northern  Americans  have  requited  such 
forbearance  is  alike  silly  and  disgusting.  I  never  ex- 
pected to  have  lived  to  think  of  them  so  unfavorably 
as  I  do  at  present.  Amidst  their  very  difiScult  present 
circumstances,  they  have  manifested  little  or  nothing 
of  those  qualities  which  inspire  sympathy  and  esteem, 
and  very  much  of  all  the  contrary  qualities;  and 
among  the  worst  of  all  their  manifestations  is  their 
appetite  for  throwing  the  blame  of  their  misfortunes  on 
guiltless  England.'  ^ 

Upon  Lord  Palmerston's  death,  in  1865,  the  Queen 
was  pleased  to  confer  upon  me  the  office  of  First  Lord 
of  the  Treasury.  When  I  had  been  received  by  the 
Cabinet  in  that  capacity,  I  proposed  to  them  to  con- 
sider whether  it  was  possible  with  public  advantage  to 
confer  the  right  of  voting  upon  the  best  of  the  work- 
ing-classes. This  was  agreed  to ;  and  it  was  likewise 
decided  that  it  would  be  best  to  separate  the  question 
of  the  franchise  from  that  of  the  disfranchisement  of 

»  *  Personal  Life  of  George  Grote/  p.  202. 


CAVE  OF  ADULLAM.  237 

borouglis.  After  much  inquiry,  we  agreed  to  ^x  the 
suffrages  of  boroughs  at  an  occupation  of  71,  value. 

The  House  of  Commons  did  not  agree  with  us  as 
to  the  separation  of  the  question  of  suffrage  from  that 
of  disfranchisement.  We  had  not  quite  made  up  our 
minds  as  to  the  shape  in  which  this  disfranchisement 
should  be  adopted. 

Our  whole  course,  however,  was  disturbed  by  the 
formation  of  a  party  which  aimed,  not  so  much  at 
the  improvement  of  a  Reform  Bill,  as  the  defeat  of 
the  Ministry.  They  owe  the  name  by  which  they  are 
known  to  the  wit  of  Mr.  Bright,  who  likened  them  to 
the  occupiers  of  the  Cave  of  Adullam.  The  band 
may  be  said  to  have  been  divided  into  three  columns 
or  gangs,  the  first  consisting  of  the  selfish,  the  second 
of  the  timid,  and  the  third  of  those  who  were  both 
selfish  and  timid.  They  had  a  leader,  who,  like  the 
Achitophel  of  Dryden,  was 

Sagacious,  bold,  and  turbulent  of  wit. 

Of  him,  as  of  Achitophel  —  supposing  his  object  was 
to  destroy  the  Ministry  —  it  might  also  be  said  — 

To  further  this,  Achitophel  unites 
The  malcontents  of  all  the  Israelites  ; 
Whose  differing  parties  he  could  wisely  join, 
For  several  ends  to  serve  the  same  design. 

There  were  no  doubt  some  honest  men  in  the  Cave  of 
Adullam  ;  but,  upon  the  whole,  I  have  never,  in  my 
long  political  life,  known  a  party  so  utterly  destitute 
of  consistent  principle  or  of  patriotic  end ;  they  were 
indifferent  to  the  state  of  the  suffrage,  or  the  disfran- 
chisement of  boroughs,  provided  their  own  selfish  ob- 
jects were  attained. 

When  these  bandits,  uniting  themselves  to  the  Tories, 


238  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

had  put  the  Government  in  a  minority,  the  Cabinet 
thought  it  right  to  offer  their  resignation.  It  was  not 
that  they  could  not  bear  a  defeat  on  a  detail  of  the 
Reform  Bill,  but  that  it  was  obvious  that  the  band  of 
Adullam  would  never  be  satisfied  till,  by  wiles  and 
stratagems,  they  had  driven  the  Ministry  from  office. 

Of  the  three  gangs  which  issued  from  the  Cave  of 
Adullam,  the  timid  inspire  pity,  the  selfish  indigna- 
tion, the  timid  and  selfish  contempt. 


REFORM  BILL,   1867.  239 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

REFORM  BILL  OF  1867.  —  MR.  GLADSTONE'S  SPEECH  ON 
THE  IRISH  CHURCH.  — GENERAL  ELECTION.  —  CHANGE 
OF  MINISTRY.  —  RETIREMENT  FROM  THE  LEAD  THAT 
I  HAD  HELD   SINCE   1834. 

When  Lord  Derby  and  Mr.  Disraeli  succeeded  me  and 
Mr.  Gladstone  as  First  Lord  of  the  Treasury  and 
Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  in  1865,  they  had  before 
them  a  task  of  no  small  difficulty.  They  had  met  our 
proposal  to  admit  the  working-men  who  lived  in  houses 
of  11.  value  with  every  kind  of  obstruction,  cavil,  and 
quibble.  They  had  maintained  strongly  that  there 
ought  to  be  no  reduction,  or,  as  Mr.  Disraeli  styled  it, 
no  degradation  of  the  franchise.  They  had  raised  the 
objection  that  there  was  no  disfranchisement  of  boroughs, 
and  therefore  the  measure  could  not  be  styled  a  com- 
plete Reform  Bill.  They  had,  lastly,  suggested  the 
objection  that  rated  value,  not  actual  value,  ought  to 
be  taken  as  the  test. 

This  question  had  been  fully  considered  when  the 
original  Reform  Bill  was  introduced  in  1831.  It  was 
then  found  that  rated  value  furnished  a  very  uncertain 
criterion,  and  that  while  in  one  borough  Ql.  rated  value 
meant  an  actual  value  of  81.  or  9Z.,  in  half  a  dozen 
other  boroughs  it  meant  10?.  or  121.  Lord  Derby  was 
a  man  who  might  have  been  deterred  by  these  diffi- 
culties from  proceeding   with   his  task ;   Mr.  Disraeli 


240  RECOLLECTIONS  AND   SUGGESTIONS. 

had  no  such  fears.  After  a  time  he  resolved  to  dis- 
regard what  was  called  a  '  hard  and  fast  line,'  and  to 
admit  every  rated  householder,  though  he  might  be 
rated  at  only  11.  or  10«.,  to  an  equal  suffrage  with  the 
101.  householder. 

Some  of  the  Tory  leaders  have  not  only  protested  as 
loudly  as  Mr.  Disraeli  against  any  reduction  of  the 
suffrage,  but  have  conscientiously  felt  the  truth  of  the 
objections  which  Mr.  Disraeli  only  assumed  as  a  con- 
venient cloak.  Three  members  of  the  Cabinet  —  Lord 
Cranborne,  Lord  Carnarvon,  and  General  Peel — left  the 
Cabinet.  Relieved  from  these  inconvenient  colleagues, 
who  were  troubled  with  a  conscience,  Mr.  Disraeli 
threw  his  net  over  Lord  Derby  and  Lord  Stanley,  and 
held  out  the  finality  of  household  suffrage  as  a  reason 
for  its  adoption. 

Disregarding,  as  Mr.  Disraeli  and  Lord  Derby  disre- 
garded, all  the  principles  which  they  had  pretended  to 
uphold,  it  is  clear  to  me  that  the  right  of  voting  for  a 
representative  body  can  only  be  founded  upon  one  of 
two  principles.  One  is,  the  Radical  principle  that  every 
adult  male  who  is  subject  to  the  laws  of  a  country  ought 
to  have  a  share  in  electing  its  representatives.  The 
other  is,  the  Whig  principle  that  the  persons  endowed 
with  the  right  of  voting  for  the  members  of  the  House 
of  Commons,  by  whom  the  whole  state  of  the  country 
is  guided  and  directed,  ought  to  be  persons  qualified  by 
property  and  education  for  the  discharge  of  so  impor- 
tant a  trust. 

Lord  Derby's  Reform  Bill  answered  neither  of  these 
descriptions.  It  did  not  comply  with  the  Radical  re- 
quirement, as  hundreds  of  thousands  of  adult  males 
were  not  admitted  to  the  franchise.  It  did  not  comply 
with  the  Whig  test,  as  many  thousands  of  rated  house- 


DEFEAT  OF  MR.  DISRAELI'S  MINISTRY.  241 

holders  were  in  a  state  of  ignorance  and  depend- 
ence. 

In  short,  the  measure  was,  as  Lord  Derby  truly  called 
it,  a  leap  in  the  dark.  Still,  it  was  brought  forward  by 
a  Government  which  had  always  professed  Conservative 
principles,  and  it  could  not  safely  be  resisted.  I  there- 
fore advised  my  friend  Mr.  Forster,  who  was  then  a 
leading  man  of  the  House  of  Commons,  to  support  the 
measure,  and  to  persuade  all  those  politically  connected 
with  him  to  do  so  likewise.  My  Whig  friends,  in  a 
small  committee,  advised  me  to  withhold  this  opinion 
from  the  public.  I  myself  wished  to  practise  no  con- 
cealment on  the  subject.  Mr.  Gladstone  had,  in  the 
same  session  which  saw  the  introduction  of  the  Reform 
Bill  of  1867,  made  an  admirable,  eloquent,  and  convinc- 
ing speech  on  the  Irish  Church.  This  speech  produced 
a  profound  impression  on  the  minds  of  the  new  electors. 
I  had  myself,  for  reasons  which  shall  be  mentioned 
hereafter,  retired  from  the  leadership  of  the  Whig- 
Radical  party.  Mr.  Disraeli's  recent  conversion  had 
won  as  little  favor  on  his  behalf  as  had  been  won  on  be- 
half of  Sir  Robert  Peel  by  his  conversion  on  the  Roman 
Catholic  question  and  on  the  repeal  of  the  Corn-laws. 
So  that,  at  the  general  election  in  the  autumn  of  1868, 
the  Ministry  were  defeated  by  a  majority  of  over  one 
hundred.  Mr.  Disraeli  resigned  without  meeting  Par- 
liament, and  Mr.  Gladstone  was  desired  by  the  Queen 
to  form  a  Ministry. 

This  task  was  performed  with  little  tact  or  discrimina- 
tion. As  Mr.  Gladstone  did  not  himself  assume  the 
office  of  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  he  ought  to  have 
placed  in  that  post  a  confidential  friend  on  whose  judg- 
ment he  could  rely.  Mr.  Cardwell  was  admirably  fitted 
for  the  post ;  he  was  sent  to  the  War  Office.    Mr.  Lowe 

16 


242  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

was  made  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer.  Mr.  Bruce 
was  well  qualified  to  organize  and  direct  the  education 
of  the  poorer  classes  throughout  the  country ;  he  was 
sent  to  the  Home  Office,  where  he  soon  became  un- 
popular—  unjustly,  no  doubt,  for  his  conduct  was 
prudent  and  judicious  ;  but  still  he  was  not  the  man  for 
that  office. 

I  will  go  no  farther.  Lord  Clarendon  was  admirably 
qualified  to  be  Secretary  of  State  for  Foreign  Affairs ; 
and  some  other  posts  were  well  filled. 

I  cannot  think  that  I  was  mistaken  in  giving  way  to 
Mr.  Gladstone  as  head  of  the  Whig-Radical  party  of 
England.  During  Lord  Palmerston's  Ministr}'-  I  had 
every  reason  to  admire  the  boldness  and  the  judgment 
with  which  he  directed  our  finances.  I  had  no  reason 
to  suppose  that  he  was  less  attached  than  I  was  to 
national  honor ;  that  he  was  less  proud  than  I  was  of 
the  achievements  of  our  nation  by  sea  and  land  ;  that 
he  disliked  the  extension  of  our  Colonies  ;  or  that  his 
measures  would  tend  to  reduce  the  great  and  glorious 
Empire  of  which  he  was  put  in  charge  to  a  manufactory 
of  cotton  cloth  and  a  market  for  cheap  goods,  with  an 
army  and  navy  reduced  by  paltry  savings  to  a  standard 
of  weakness  and  inefficiency. 


\ 


IRELAND.  243 


CHAPTER  IX. 

JUSTICE   TO  IRELAND. 

The  question  of  the  government  of  Ireland  is  a  very 
large  one.  I  think  I  cannot  do  better  than  lay  down 
the  propositions  which  I  wish  to  establish  with  a  view 
to  the  better  government  of  that  country. 

I.  That  murders  in  Ireland  are  not  the  insulated 
crimes  of  persons  excited  by  covetousness  or  revenge, 
but  the  deliberate  acts  of  a  powerful  confederacy  which, 
in  defiance  of  the  Queen  and  Parliament,  orders  the 
infliction  of  a  criminal  law  more  formidable  than  the 
law  of  the  State.  This  proposition  can  be  demonstrated 
both  by  authority  and  by  numerous  instances. 

II.  That  the  Roman  Catholic  clergy,  in  the  capacity 
of  parish  priests,  have  great  sway  over  the  minds  of 
the  people  of  Ireland  ;  but  being  entirely  dependent 
upon  the  voluntary  offerings  of  their  flocks,  are,  from 
sympathy  or  from  fear,  unwilling  to  appear  as  the  pros- 
ecutors of  the  confederacy  that  direx3ts  and  executes 
murders. 

III.  That  the  remedy  for  these  evils  is  to  be  sought 
in  such  a  reform  of  the  criminal  law  as  would  place 
convictions  for  murder  in  the  hands  of  a  majority  of 
the  jury ;  and,  secondly,  in  making  a  provision  for  the 
Roman  Catholic  parish  priests  of  Ireland  out  of  the 
revenues  of  the  Protestant  Church,  after  the  expiry  of 
life-interests,  with  a  provisional  grant  in  the  interval 
from  the  Consolidated  Fund. 


244  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

IV.  That  the  Secretary  of  State  for  the  Home 
Department  of  Great  Britain  ought  to  have  in  Ireland 
the  same  powers  of  administration  which  he  exercises 
in  England  and  in  Scotland. 

V.  That  Scotland,  before  the  Union  of  England  and 
Scotland,  suffered  from  evils  not  very  different  from 
those  to  which  Ireland  is  now  exposed,  but  by  the 
wisdom  of  Lord  Somers  and  Lord  Chatham,  the  Low- 
lands of  Scotland  have  been  led  to  prosperity,  and  the 
Highlands  of  Scotland  have  been  pacified.  A  similar 
policy  applied  to  Ireland  will  probably  be  attended  with 
similar  effects. 

VI.  Home  Rule  must  be  met  with  as  peremptory  a 
refusal  as  that  which  Lord  Grey  and  Lord  Althorp  gave 
to  repeal  of  the  Union  in  1880. 

I.  In  Mr.  Nassau  Senior's  '  Journals  upon  Ireland,' 
there  occurs,  in  the  narrative  of  the  year  1852,  a  very 
interesting  conversation  between  Lord  Rosse  and  Mr. 
Senior,  in  which  Lord  Rosse  is  asked  what  he  would  do 
if  he  were  Minister,  and  had  a  fair  working  majority. 
After  stating  that  he  '  would  make  the  Disarming  Act 
general  and  permanent,  and  allow  very  few  exceptions,' 
Lord  Rosse  goes  on  to  say :  *  I  would  then  reform  the 
stipendiary  magistracy.  On  this  institution  the  security 
of  the  country  mainly  depends.  As  soon  as  an  outrage 
has  been  committed  it  is  the  duty  of  the  stipendiary 
magistrate  to  collect  into  a  focus  the  slight  and  transi- 
tory indications,  which,  if  acutely  perceived  and  sedu- 
lously followed  up,  will  lead  to  detection.  No  function 
requires  more  zeal,  vigor,  and  intelligence.  The  men 
Belccted  for  it  are  generally  elderly  rou/^s^  with  broken 
fortunes  and  damaged  reputations,  who  are  made  sti- 
pendiaries because  their  patrons  do  not  venture  to  make 
them  any  thing  else.     I  have  implored  Lord  Lieutenant 


IRELAND.  245 

after  Lord  Lieutenant  not  to  allow  so  important  an  office 
to  be  thus  jobbed  away.  All  that  I  could  get  from  any 
one  of  them  were  promises  that  the  appointments  should 
be  as  little  bad  as  they  could  make  them.  .  .  .  The 
appointments  should  be  made  in  England,  or,  if  in  Ire- 
land, two  persons  should  concur,  and  I  would  require 
them  to  be  chosen  from  the  police  —  that  is  to  say, 
from  the  officers  of  the  constabulary.  This  would  se- 
cure their  having  some  experience  in  the  investigation 
of  crime,  and  would,  besides,  raise  the  character  of  the 
police  force.  ...  I  would  endeavor  to  extend  the 
field  of  summary  convictions.  Juries  are  fit  only  for 
countries  in  which  the  people  are  the  friends  of  the  law. 
In  Ireland  it  is  difficult  to  find  a  jury  that  dares,  or  even 
wishes,  to  do  its  duty.  Where  juries  mast  be  retained, 
I  would  adopt  the  Scotch  plan,  and  make  them  decide 
by  a  majority,  and  make  it  penal  to  reveal  how  each 
juryman  voted.  Among  the  mischiefs  of  requiring  a 
unanimous  verdict  is  its  publicity.  .  .  .  The  prevention 
and  punishment  of  crime  are  all  that  we  want.  Emi- 
gration will  restore  the  proportion  between  population 
and  subsistence.  Under  the  National  School  system 
education  is  rapidly  spreading.  The  physical  resources 
of  Ireland  are  vast  and  almost  untouched.  But  we  are 
under  two  different  and  repugnant  systems  of  law.  One 
is  enacted  by  Parliament  and  enforced  by  the  courts, 
the  other  is  concocted  in  the  whiskey-shop  and  executed 
by  the  assassin.  And  the  law  of  the  people  is  far  better 
enforced  than  that  of  the  Government.  Those  who 
break  it  are  generally  sure  to  be  detected,  for  their 
offences  are  generally  public ;  the  punishment  is  as 
severe  as  any  that  man  can  inflict  or  suffer,  and  the 
chances  of  escaping  it  are  few.  The  popular  law,  there- 
fore,  is   obeyed,   the  Government  law  is  disregarded. 


246  EECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

Give  US  merely  security.  Let  the  proprietor  be  master 
of  his  land,  the  manufacturer  of  his  capital,  and  the 
laborer  of  his  strength  and  skill,  and  the  virtues  which 
we  now  seem  to  want  —  industry,  frugality,  and  provi- 
dence —  will  spring  up  as  soon  as  they  can  depend  on 
their  reward.'  ^ 

Three  examples  may  be  here  given  of  murders  in 
Ireland.  The  first  is  extracted  from  Mr.  Trench's 
*  Realities  of  Irish  Life.'  ^ 

Mr.  Trench,  in  his  '  Realities  of  Irish  Life,'  relates 
the  occurrence  of  a  robbery  at  the  house  of  a  Mr.  Hall, 
in  the  year  1838.     He  goes  on  to  say :  — 

'  Thenceforth,  without  any  reasonable  caijse  that  I 
could  ascertain,  Mr.  Hall  became  exceedingly  unpopular 
and  obnoxious  to  the  peasantry.' 

He  then  pipceeds,  with  reference  to  the  same  year :  — 

'  A  few  months  after  this  occurrence,  on  the  18th  of 
May,  a  beautiful  bright  sunny  day,  at  noon,  I  was  riding 
with  a  friend  to  the  sessions  at  Borrisokane.  I  heard  a 
faint  report  at  a  little  distance  in  the  fields  as  of  a  gun 
or  pistol,  but  took  no  notice  of  it,  when,  almost  immedi- 
ately afterwards,  a  man  came  running  up  a  lane  to  meet 
us,  saying,  "  Oh  !  sir,  Mr.  Hall  has  just  been  shot." 

*  "  Shot!  "  cried  I,  pulling  up  my  horee  ;  "do  you 
mean  murdered  ?  " 

'  "  Oh  I  yes,  sir,"  replied  the  man,  "  he  is  lying  there 
in  the  field." 

'  "  Is  he  dead  ?  "  I  asked. 

'  "  Stone  dead  I  "  was  the  man's  reply  ;  and  as  he  said 
so  I  never  shall  forget  the  strange  mixture  of  horror  and 
of  triumph  which  pervaded  his  countenance. 

i  Nassau  Senior's  'Ireland,'  vol.  ii.  pp.  82-84. 

2  'Realities  of  Irisli  Life.'  By  W.  S.  Trench.  Boston:  Roberto 
Bros. 


lEELAND.  247 

*  T  turned  to  a  gentleman  of  well-known  courage,  and 
a  daring  rider,  and  said,  "Can  we  do  nothing,  Mr. 
Smith  ?  The  murderer  cannot  have  gone  far.  Surely 
we  might  make  a  circuit  round  the  place  across  the 
country  ;  and  though  no  one  will  tell  us  which  way  he 
ran,  we  may  by  this  means  come  up  with  him  or  see  him. 
We  are  both  well-mounted  and  armed  —  let  us  try." 

' "  Hush !  my  dear  sir,"  replied  he,  "  the  murderer 
never  ran ;  that  would  at  once  betray  him.  He  is 
surely  in  the  field  with  us  at  this  moment,  and  is  prob- 
ably one  of  those  now  looking  at  the  body  and  express- 
ing his  wonder  at  who  did  it."  ' 

Mr.  Trench  proceeds  to  describe  the  murder  :  — 

'  Mr.  Hall  was  still  walking  in  the  fields,  enjoying 
the  freshness  of  this  sunny  day  in  May.  The  young 
man  came  up  unperceived  within  twenty  yards  of  him. 
Mr.  Hall  heard  him,  and  turned  round  and  faced  him. 
The  murderer  walked  on,  still  without  speaking  or 
showing  his  pistol,  straight  up  to  Mr.  Hall.  Mr.  Hall 
was  amazed ;  but  seeing  him  still  coming  steadily  and 
silently  on,  he  half  drew  his  sword-cane,  at  last  sus- 
pecting that  mischief  must  be  intended.  The  man  still 
continuing  to  approach,  Mr.  Hall  sprang  back  a  step  or 
two  in  order  to  get  his  sword-cane  free,  and  in  doing  so 
stumbled  over  a  tussock  and  fell.  The  young  man  then 
went  up,  and  before  Mr.  Hall  could  get  up  or  recover 
himself,  he  put  the  pistol  down  close  to  his  head  and 
shot  him  dead  upon  the  spot.  The  moment  he  had  done 
so  he  threw  the  pistol  into  the  adjoining  hedge,  walked 
quietly  to  meet  his  companion,  put  his  hands  into  his 
pockets,  never  left  the  ground,  and  was  one  of  those 
whom  we  afterwards  saw  standing  near  the  body. 

'  Such  was  the  story  as  told  by  the  man  who  had 
been  originally  hired  to  murder  Mr.  Hall,  but  who  had 


248  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

now  turned  informer;  and  his  testimony  was  corrob- 
orated by  a  chain  of  evidence  so  clear  and  conclusive, 
that  not  a  doubt  of  its  truth  was  left  upon  the  mind  of 
a  single  grand  juror  who  heard  him. 

'  The  trial  was  rather  a  peculiar  one ;  and,  contrary 
to  general  expectation,  the  judge's  charge  was  decidedly 
in  favor  of  the  prisoner.  The  jury  were  evidently  puz- 
zled, but  they  threw  the  benefit  of  the  doubts  enter- 
tained by  the  majority  in  favor  of  the  prisoner  at  the 
bar,  as  they  were  justly  bound  to  do  ;  and  it  was  after- 
wards openly  announced  that  eleven  were  for  the  acquit- 
tal, and  only  one  for  a  conviction.  Nothing  could  turn 
this  man  from  his  unwavering  belief  that  the  prisoner 
had  done  the  deed ;  and  after  the  usual  time  the  jury 
was  discharged,  and  the  prisoner  remanded  to  gaol. 

'Such  scenes  as  these  could  not  fail  to  produce  a 
strong  effect  upon  the  gentry  resident  around,  and 
urgent  letters  were  written  by  myself  and  other  gen- 
tlemen to  the  Government ;  and  at  last  a  "  Special 
Commission  "  was  ordered  at  Clonmel  for  the  trial  of 
several  Ribbon  cases,  and  of  Mr.  Hall's  murderer  in 
particular,  of  the  guilt  of  whom  the  authorities  had  not 
a  doubt. 

'  The  Special  Commission  was  looked  upon,  and  justly 
80,  as  a  very  formidable  affair.  The  judges  chosen  by 
the  Government  to  preside  were  Judges  Doherty  and 
Pennefather.  They  sat  together,  as  is  usual  in  a  Spe- 
cial Commission.  Almost  all  the  gentlemen  in  the 
county  attended,  and  were  prepared  to  serve  asjuroi's; 
and  .Clonmel,  where  the  Commission  was  hold,  was 
crowded  to  excess.  The  opening  of  the  Commission 
had  a  very  solemn  effect.  The  first  trial  was  that  of 
Mr.  IJall's  murderer.  The  prisoner  was  again  brought 
to  the  bar  and  arraigned  ;  he  was  paler  than  when  tried 


IRELAND.  249 

before  at  Nenagh,  but  he  still  preserved  the  same  impas- 
sive resolution.  The  grand  jury  was  duly  sworn,  the 
bills  were  found,  and  then  came  the  swearing-in  of  the 
petty  jury  who  were  to  try  the  case,  and  on  whom 
the  cause  of  justice  and  the  life  of  the  prisoner  de- 
pended. The  prisoner  was  allowed  twenty  challenges 
peremptorily,  and  as  many  more  as  he  could  show  cause 
for.  It  was  an  exciting  scene,  and  great  quickness  and 
knowledge  of  character  were  required  on  the  part  of 
the  prisoner's  counsel  and  attorney.  Of  course  their 
object,  so  far  as  their  right  of  challenge  would  allow 
them,  was  to  challenge  and  reject  all  the  firm,  fair,  and 
upright  men  in  the  county,  and  to  place  upon  the  jury 
the  timid,  or  those  whose  sympathies,  from  political, 
religious,  or  other  reasons,  might  be  supposed  to  lean 
towards  the  prisoner. 

'  But  they  had  not  much  time  to  decide.  As  the 
name  of  each  juror  resounded  through  the  court,  and 
the  person  called  answered  to  his  name,  the  crier 
handed  the  small  Testament  to  the  man  now  about 
to  be  sworn,  and  said  aloud,  slowly  and  solemnly, 
"Prisoner,  look  upon  the  juror, — juror,  look  upon  the 
prisoner ;  "  and  then  he  commenced  the  oath.  At  this 
moment,  and  with  no  more  time  to  consult  or  determine 
than  I  have  stated,  the  prisoner's  attorney  cried  out  in 
a  loud  voice,  "  Challenge !  "  if  he  thought  the  juror 
likely  to  be  unfavorable  to  his  cp.use.  The  effect  was 
very  striking.  And  as  gentleman  after  gentleman  were 
*'  challenged,"  it  became  a  decided  compliment  to  be 
rejected.  At  length  my  name  was  called.  I  ansAvered, 
came  forward  \to  the  front,  and  took  the  Testament  in 
my  hand.  I  felt  that  all  eyes  were  upon  me.  It  was 
well  known  that  the  murder  had  been  committed  near 
my  residence,  and  that  I  had  been  almost  present  at  the 


250  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

scene.  "Prisoner,  look  upon  the  juror, — juror,  look 
upon  the  prisoner."  We  both  looked  steadily  at  each 
other,  and  just  as  I  thought  the  oath  was  about  to 
be  administered,  "  Challenge  !  "  resounded  through  the 
court.  I  cannot  describe  my  emotion  as  I  felt  re- 
lieved from  the  onus  of  such  a  trial. 

*  At  length  a  jury  —  and  by  no  means  a  bad  one  — 
was  sworn.  So  many  good  jurors  had  attended,  that 
the  prisoner  had  no  great  choice  ;  his  challenges  were 
soon  exhausted,  and  a  jury —  admitted  in  general  to  be 
a  fair  one  —  proceeded  now  to  listen  to  the  intensely 
interesting  statement  of  the  Attorne3'-General,  who 
began  to  open  his  case.  The  trial  proceeded  with  all 
the  grave  solemnity  which  was  suited  to  such  an  occa- 
sion. The  witnesses  gave  their  evidence  clearly,  con- 
sistently, and  well ;  nor  did  the  cross-examination  of 
the  prisoner's  counsel,  though  conducted  in  the  ablest 
manner,  shake  their  testimony  in  the  least.  All  who 
heard  the  evidence  plainly  saw  that  a  conviction  must 
ensue. 

'  The  disclosures  which  the  informer  had  necessarily 
made,  when  examined  on  the  previous  trial,  gave  the 
prisoner's  counsel  a  great  advantage  over  him.  He 
now  knew  the  whole  of  the  informer's  story,  and  made 
the  most  of  his  knowledge  in  his  cross-examination  ; 
but  still  he  failed  to  shake  the  frightful  truthfulness 
of  his  evidence.  One  scene  struck  me  much.  After 
the  witness  had  detailed  how  he  had  himself  under- 
taken to  be  the  murderer,  and  had  twice  stolen  behind 
Mr.  Hall  for  the  purpose  of  shooting  him  in  the  back, 
and  had  only  given  up  his  design  becautye  he  fancied  it 
was  "  unlucky,"  the  prisoner's  counsel  said,  "Then  it 
was  not  your  conscience  which  smote  you  ?  ** 

' "  Not  a  hit .'"  replied  the  man. 


IRELAND.  251 

' "  And  you  stole  up  behind  the  poor  old  gentleman 
to  shoot  him  for  money?  "  said  the  lawyer. 

'  "  I  suppose  you  would  do  any  thing  for  money  ?  " 

'  "  I  would^''  replied  the  man,  quite  unappalled,  and 
growing  desperate. 

'  The  lawyer  still  continued  to  excite  him. 

' "  You  would  shoot  your  father  for  money,  I  sup- 
pose?" 

*  "  Iwould^''  exclaimed  the  man  furiously. 

<  u  Q^  yQ>^y.  riTjfiother  f  " 

'''I  would:' 

^''^  Or  your  sinter  f  " 

'''I  would:' 

'  "  Or  your  brother?  " 

' "  ^^,  or  yourself  either!''  cried  the  infuriated  ruf- 
fian. 

'  The  prisoner  was  condemned,  and  executed  a  fort- 
night after  his  conviction. 

'  Tipperary  for  a  long  time  after  was  quiet.'  ^ 

I  will  now  give  two  instances  of  murder  where  no 
conviction  took  place. 

But  before  doing  this,  I  will  take  an  instance  of  a 
person  who  just  missed  falling  a  victim  to  a  plan  for 
his  assassination. 

Mr.  Nicholson,  being  a  man  of  large  means,  spent 
40,000?.  in  endeavors  to  improve  his  estate  by  fencing, 
draining,  restoring  the  fertility  of  districts  left  almost 
barren  by  the  exhaustion  of  overcropping,  and  the 
removal  of  cabins  left  vacant  by  emigration. 

Casserly  the  elder  occupied  a  miserable  cabin,  which 
was  the  residence  of  Casserly  himself  and   his  wife, 

1  *  Realities  of  Irish  Life,'  p.  51. 


252  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

a  married  daughter,  with  her  husband  and  several 
children,  and  of  an  unmarried  son.  When  this  son 
wished  to  marry,  Casserly  proposed  to  remove  him  to 
a  wretched  hole,  which  was  only  fit  for  an  ass,  and 
had  been  occupied  for  that  purpose.  Mr.  Nicholson 
offered  3^oung  Casserly  twelve  guineas  to  enable  him  to 
emigrate,  and  on  his  refusal  to  accept  the  offer  deter- 
mined to  remove  him  as  a  tenant.  Hence  the  attempt 
to  hold  him  up  to  odium,  and  then  the  attempt  to 
murder  him. 

But  the  case  which  was  the  immediate  cause  of  a 
conspiracy  to  assassinate  Mr.  Nicholson  arose  on  a 
notice  to  quit  being  given  to  a  man  named  Lanham, 
who  occupied  fourteen  acres,  at  a  rent  of  18?.  10«.,  as 
tenant  from  year  to  year. 

After  being  frequently  defeated  in  courts  of  law, 
and  finally  in  the  House  of  Lords,  Lanham  resolved  to 
obtain,  if  not  victory,  at  least  revenge,  and  hired  men 
to  murder  Mr.  Nicholson  on  his  return  from  Dublin. 
On  the  necessary  particulars  being  obtained,  two  men 
were  told  off  with  loaded  fire-arms  to  await  the  passing 
of  the  carriage  from  the  railway  station  to  Mr.  Nichol- 
son's house. 

The  following  particulars  are  taken  from  a  pamphlet 
entitled  '  A  Chapter  of  Irish  Landlordism  ' :  — 

'  On  the  afternoon  fixed  for  the  tragedy,  Mr.  Nichol- 
son drove  in  an  open  carriage  from  Kells,  accompanied 
by  his  niece.  Miss  Staples.  In  the  rear  of  the  carriage 
a  seat  was  placed,  the  occupant  of  which  —  a  well- 
armed  guard,  who  was  an  ex-constable  of  the  constabulary 
—  sat  with  his  back  to  the  carriage.  On  previous  oc- 
casions the  guard  was  in  the  habit  of  sitting  on  the 
box-seat  with  the  coachman  ;  the  change  of  position 
having  been  made  for  supposed  greater  security.     As 


IRISH  MURDERS.  253 

the  carriage  was  driven  forward  to  the  place  where  the 
intended  assassins  were  in  ambush,  the  change  of  posi- 
tion of  the  guard  appears  to  have  induced  them  to  fire 
as  the  carriage  was  approaching,  instead  of  waiting  till 
it  came  up,  when  they  might  be  unpleasantly  confronted 
with  the  guard.  This  alteration  of  arrangement  proved 
fatal  to  the  success  of  the  scheme,  the  guns  having 
been  discharged  so  that  their  contents  completely  rid- 
dled the  unfortunate  coachman ;  only  two  stray  slugs 
reached  Mr.  Nicholson  and  Miss  Staples ;  the  former 
being  struck  on  the  forearm  and  the  latter  on  the  shoul- 
der, the  wound  in  either  case  not  being  of  a  dangerous 
character.  The  guard  immediately  fired  after  the  as- 
sassins, whom  he  saw  moving  off,  but,  as  it  appeared, 
without  effect.  The  horses,  finding  themselves  liber- 
ated from  control,  commenced  to  plunge,  but  Mr.  Nichol- 
son soon  obtained  possession  of  the  reins;  and  Miss 
Staples,  with  great  presence  of  mind,  at  once  went  to 
the  assistance  of  the  guard  in  supporting  the  dying 
coachman.  In  this  way  the  beleaguered  party  pro- 
ceeded to  their  destination.  These  events  occurred  in 
the  month  of  October,  1869.' 

The  complicity  of  the  people  with  the  Ribbon  con- 
spiracy seems  not  to  admit  of  question.  '  A  thatcher, 
who  had  been  at  work  during  the  day  on  the  roof  of 
one  of  the  cottages,  retired  inside  and  shut  himself  up 
before  the  carriage  came  forward.  An  old  pensioner 
of  the  family,  whose  father  was  also  a  dependant  on 
Balrath  House,  made  an  observation  in  the  early  part 
of  the  day  in  Kells  that  "  if  the  ould  gentleman  lived 
tlirough  that  day  he  would  live  for  ever."  Another 
circumstance  proving  complicity  is,  that  at  two  o'clock 
on  the  day  of  the  attempt,  a  countryman  in  the  town 
of  Balbriggan,  more    than  thirty  miles  from   Balrath, 


254  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

announced  that  Mr.  Nicholson  had  been  shot.  Another 
circumstance  worth  recalling  was,  that  although  the 
village  had  the  appearance  of  being  deserted  up  to  the 
time  of  the  outrage,  people  were  seen  passing  in  crowds 
immediately  after  the  shots  had  been  fired.  With  re- 
spect to  the  punishment  of  so  foul  and  notorious  a 
crime,  several  arrests  were  made  of  supposed  guilty 
parties ;  but  as  no  satisfactory  evidence  was  procured, 
the  prisoners  were  all  eventually  discharged.' 

I  wish  to  compare  the  circumstances  already  related 
with  any  thing  that  can  be  supposed  to  happen  in  Eng- 
land upon  the  perpetration  of  a  similar  crime.  Could 
any  attempt  at  assassination  occur  in  the  case  of  a 
gentleman  returning  in  his  carriage  to  his  country  house 
from  the  railway  station  ?  Would  not  all  the  neighbor- 
hood be  alarmed  ?  and  would  not  the  assassins  be  capt- 
ured and  made  subject  to  the  law  ?  Is  it  possible  that 
when  a  land-owner  has  been  murdered,  his  murderer 
should  gaze  quietly  on  the  dead  body  and  mix  famil- 
iarly with  all  the  laborers  in  the  field  ? 

What  is  now  the  state  of  affairs  at  Balrath  ? 

In  December,  1872,  Mr.  Nicholson  died  at  a  good 
old  age,  the  establishment  was  broken  up,  and  Mr. 
Christopher  Nicholson,  the  present  owner,  has  gone  to 
reside  in  England. 

I  will  further  remark,  that  a  pair  of  white  gloves 
have  been  given  to  the  judge  at  Kells,  but  that  those 
gloves  would  have  more  properly  been  given  to  the 
chiefs  of  the  Ribbon  confederacy  in  Ireland  ;  for  to 
them  it  is  owing  that  Mr.  Christopher  Nicholson  is  safe 
in  England,  and  has  not  been  murdered  in  the  county 
of  Meath.  I  must,  however,  ask  how  it  is  that,  more 
than  seventy  years  after  the  Union  with  England,  the 
supreme  force  in  Ireland  is  vested,  not  in  the  judges 


IRISH  MURDERS.  255 

and  ministers  of  the  law,  but  in  the  Ribbon  confeder- 
acy ?  Remedies  are  not  far  to  seek.  If  giving  to  the 
majority  of  a  jury,  as  in  Scotland,  the  power  of  con- 
viction should  prove  inadequate,  let  tribunals  be  created 
of  men  sufficiently  intelligent  to  weigh  the  value  of 
evidence,  and  sufficiently  independent  not  to  be  swa3^ed 
by  relationship  with  the  criminal,  or  fear  of  the  Ribbon 
confederacy. 

Another  instance  of  a  crime  perpetrated  with  impu- 
nity by  the  members  of  the  Ribbon  confederacy  oc- 
curred the  year  before  last.  Mrs.  Neill,  who  lived  in 
her  own  house,  at  5  Sydenham  Terrace,  Rathmines,  a 
suburb  of  Dublin,  had  interfered  in  a  dispute  between 
two  of  her  tenants.  The  dispute  arose  about  a  right 
of  way.  The  cattle  of  one  tenant  having  trespassed  on 
the  land  of  another,  Mrs.  Neill  sanctioned  a  proposal 
to  put  a  gate  to  prevent  the  trespass ;  and  as  the  other 
tenant  refused  to  submit  she  served  on  him  herself  a 
process  of  ejectment.  It  was  ascertained  at  the  office 
of  Mrs.  Neill's  solicitor  that  an  affidavit  of  the  service 
of  ejectment  would  be  made  on  a  certain  day.  On  the 
day  previous  to  that  arranged  for  making  the  affidavit, 
which  was  on  May  27,  1872,  tAvo  men  knocked  at  her 
door  at  Rathmines.  Mrs.  Neill  hearing  the  knock 
went  herself  to  open  the  door ;  upon  her  doing  so  one 
of  the  men  fired  a  pistol  at  her  breast,  causing  her  im- 
mediate death.  No  legal  evidence  could  be  procured 
of  this  murder.  The  coroner's  verdict  of  '  Wilful  mur- 
der against  some  person  or  persons  unknown '  was 
returned,  and  no  one  was  made  amenable  for  the 
crime. 

It  might  be  supposed  that  so  horrible  a  crime,  com- 
mitted in  open  day,  in  a  suburb  of  the  great  city  of 
Dublin,  would  have  spread  terror  and  alarm,  and  that 


256  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

the  Government,  by  large  offers  of  reward  and  by 
extraordinary  means,  would  have  sought  to  punish  so 
horrible  an  outrage.  But  the  crime  seems  to  have 
been  passed  over  as  an  ordinary  occurrence,  and  the 
criminal  law  of  the  Ribbon  society  seems  to  have  had 
its  sentence  of  death  executed  without  difficulty,  and 
the  crime  was  allowed  to  pass  without  special  inquiry. 
If  the  late  Government  of  Ireland  earned  approbation 
by  the  abolition  of  a  Church  Establishment  which  had 
no  root  in  the  affections  of  the  people,  and  by  giving  a 
remedy  to  tenants  who  are  evicted  from  their  homes 
without  any  justifiable  cause,  so  much  the  more  is  it 
necessary  to  carry  into  effect,  with  strictness  and  impar- 
tiality, that  protection  of  life  and  property  which  is  the 
first  duty  of  a  Government.  No  hospitality,  however 
I)rincoly,  no  magnificence  of  banquets  and  of  balls,  no 
urbanity  of  manners,  no  observance  of  state  ceremonials, 
can  excuse  a  Government  for  allowing  murder  to  be  com- 
mitted with  impunity  at  the  will  of  a  lawless  confederacy, 
whose  agents  are  unpunished,  and  whose  orders  seem 
to  be  implicitly  obeyed.  At  the  end  of  the  seventeenth 
century,  Scotland  was  infested  by  troops  and  bands  of 
men  to  whom  murder,  incest,  and  robbery  were  familiar. 
The  Government  of  Great  Britain  knew  its  duties  and 
performed  tliem  with  resolution.  Before  many  3'ears 
liad  expired  the  farmers  and  manufacturei"s  of  Scotland 
could  pursue  their  occupations  in  peace,  and  assert  the 
rights  of  property  with  advantage  to  the  owner  of 
land  and  his  tenants.  In  1780,  law  and  order  were 
observed  in  Scotland.  In  1872,  law  and  order  could  not 
run  their  course  in  Ireland. 

We  shall  be  told,  no  doubt,  by  a  powerful  portion  of 
the  press  of  London,  that  the  people  of  Ireland  are 
incurable  barbarians,  and  that  the   spirit   of    anarchy 


IRELAND.  257 

cannot  be  exorcised  by  any  magic  which  human  wit  can 
devise.  But  there  is  no  truth  in  this  allegation.  An 
admirable  body  of  constabulary,  devised  by  Sir  Robert 
Peel,  performs  its  duties  with  fidelity  and  discipline  ; 
the  administration  of  the  Poor-law,  opposed  by  the 
great  demagogue  of  Ireland,  works  its  way  with  regu- 
larity and  directs  its  machinery  more  efficiently  than  a 
similar  administration  in  England.  The  judges  perform 
their  functions  without  disturbance  ;  and  although  they 
6iay  be  hooted  or  burned  in  effigy,  if  they  perform  their 
duties  as  the  judges  of  Queen  Victoria,  and  not  in 
compliance  with  the  dictates  of  a  seditious  press,  their 
judgments  are  carried  into  effect  without  resistance. 

I  now  proceed  to  my  second  proposition  :  that  the 
Roman  Catholic  clergy,  in  the  capacity  of  parish  priests, 
have  great  sway  over  the  minds  of  the  people  of  Ire- 
land, but,  being  entirely  dependent  upon  the  voluntary 
offerings  of  their  flocks,  are,  from  sympathy  or  from 
fear,  unwilling  to  appear  as  the  prosecutors  of  the  con- 
federacy that  directs  and  executes  murders. 

It  should  be  the  study  of  wise  rulers  to  govern  the 
states  over  which  they  are  supreme  according  to  the 
disposition  of  the  nations  they  have  to  govern,  but 
always  in  such  a  manner  as  to  foster  their  virtues  and 
to  repress  their  vices. 

Mr.  Froude,  in  the  able  work  upon  Ireland  which  he 
has  published,  has  observed  that  after  the  conquest  of 
Ireland  by  the  Normans,  the  difficulty  of  Ireland  from 
first  to  last  has  been  '  because  the  effort  of  the  conquer- 
ors was  to  govern  the  Irish,  not  as  a  vassal  province, 
but  as  a  free  nation  ;  to  extend  the  forms  of  English 
liberty  —  her  trials  by  jury,  her  local  courts,  her  Parlia- 
ments—  to  a  people  essentially  unfit  for  them;    and, 

17 


258       RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

while  governing  Ireland,  to  teach  her  at  the  same  time 
the  harder  lesson  —  how  to  govenj  herself.*^ 

In  considering  the  Irish  character,  I  have  to  observe 
that  the  Irish  have  two  remarkable  virtues  and  two 
prominent  defects.  The  two  virtues  are,  a  sincere  love 
of  religion  and  a  strong  sense  of  justice;  the  two 
defects  are,  vanity  and  pugnacity.  It  has  been  the 
mistake  of  the  English  rulers  of  Ireland  to  check,  to 
curb,  and  to  misguide  the  sense  of  religion  and  the  love 
of  justice,  and  to  indulge  the  vanity  and  pugnacity  of 
the  nation.  In  the  reign  of  Henry  II.  titles  were 
granted  by  Pope  Adrian  to  the  King  of  England.  The 
Koman  Catholic  religion  continued  without  interruption 
to  be  the  faith  of  the  nation  till  the  period  of  the 
Reformation;  but  at  the  period  of  the  Reformation, 
Elizabeth,  without  any  preparatory  steps,  decreed  that 
the  nation  should  be  Protestant.  The  Reformation 
deepened  the  animosity  which  the  Irish  felt  towards 
England.  To  the  animosities  of  race  and  the  dispos- 
session of  the  Irish,  guilty  of  rebellion,  from  their 
lands,  were  added  the  animosity  of  an  oppressed  re- 
ligion. Down  to  the  year  1778,  a  priest  who  celebrated 
the  mass  according  to  his  own  faith  and  that  of  the 
people  to  whom  he  administered  was  liable  to  imprison- 
ment for  his  ofPence.  Lord  Shelburne,  the  great-grand- 
father of  the  present  Marquis  of  Lansdowne,  when 
Secretary  of  State,  was  obliged  to  implore  the  mercy  of 
the  Crown  to  save  a  priest  from  the  legal  penalty  which 
he  had  incurred  by  saying  mass.  The  Protestant 
Church  had  always  been  a  sickly  exotic,  and  had  never 
taken  root  in  the  soil. 

It  was  obvious  that  when,  in  1830,  the  Whigs  came 

1  •  The  English  in  Ireland/  by  J.  A.  Froude,  toI.  i.  p.  18.  , 


IRELAND.  259 

into  power,  the  difficulty  of  the  Irish  Church  was  to  be 
encountered  ;  and  Lord  Ripon  was  not  wrong  in  stating 
that  the  appointment  of  a  Commission  to  inquire  was 
equivalent  to  an  Act  of  Parliament  to  abolish.  But 
there  were  evidently  four  courses  to  pursue. 

The  first  course  was  that  of  Lord  Lansdowne — to 
diminish  the  church  revenues  gradual^  and  partially, 
to  find  some  kindred  object  to  which  the  surplus  reve- 
nues could  be  applied,  and  to  content  ourselves  with 
that  imperfect  remedy.  The  second  course  was  to 
secularize  the  church  revenues,  and  to  give  the  whole 
of  those  revenues  to  secular  purposes,  such  as  hospitals 
and  lunatic  asylums.  The  third  course  was  to  transfer 
the  revenues,  after  the  expiry  of  life-interests,  to  the 
Roman  Catholic  clergy.  The  fourth  would  be  not  Yery 
different  in  principle  from  the  third ;  it  would  consist 
of  an  endowment  for  the  Roman  Catholics  in  the  prov- 
inces of  Leinster,  Munster,  and  Connaught,  and  for 
the  Presbyterians  in  Ulster. 

I  do  not  include  the  absurd  proposal  of  making  a 
grant  to  every  sect,  however  small  its  numbers. 

The  first  of  these  proposals  was  that  which  I  sub- 
mitted to  Parliament  for  some  years,  and  which  I  only 
abandoned  from  seeing  that  a  small  majority  in  the 
House  of  Commons  would  never  prevail  over  a  strong 
majority  in  the  House  of  Lords.  In  fact,  the  people  of 
England  never  took  up  warmly  the  appropriation  clause, 
and,  indeed,  were  not  persuaded  that  the  Protestant 
Church  in  Ireland  could  be  that  miserable,  monopolizing 
minority  which  Fox  had  described  it  to  be. 

The  second  coi\rse  is  stated  by  a  committee  of  Mr. 
O'Connell  in  very  clear  terms  as  follows :  — 

'  Your  committee  claim  that  the  ecclesiastical  state 
revenues  should  (as  the  existing  vested  interests  dropped 


260  RECOLLECTIONS  AND   SUGGESTIONS. 

off)  be  applied  for  the  general  benefit  of  the  com- 
munity ;  that  is,  for  the  support  of  the  poor,  for  the 
promotion  of  education,  and  in  works  of  charity,  equally 
and  without  distinction,  to  all  sects  and  persuasions.'  ^ 

On  this  proposal  it  may  be  remarked,  that  the  sup- 
port of  the  poor  has  been  provided  for  by  separate  Acts 
of  Parliament,  and  that  education  is  supplied  by  large 
annual  grants  of  Parliament. 

As  to  hospitals,  it  is  to  be  supposed  that  the  nurses 
would  be  after  the  model  of  Mrs.  Quickly,  who  is  much 
shocked  that  Falstaff,  when  not  in  immediate  danger, 
should  mention  the  name  of  God. 

'  "  How  now,  Sir  John  ?  "  quoth  I ;  "  what,  man  !  be 
of  good  cheer."  So  'a  cried  out,  "•  God,  God,  God  !  " 
three  or  four  times.  Now  I,  to  comfort  him,  bid  him  'a 
should  not  think  of  God ;  I  hoped  there  was  no  need 
to  trouble  himself  with  any  such  thoughts  yet.'  ^ 

The  setting  up  of  hospitals  and  lunatic  asylums  in  all 
the  great  towns  of  Ireland  would  doubtless  furnish  an 
opening  for  many  jobs,  and  the  Patronage  Secretary  of 
the  Treasury  might  gain  several  converts  from  Home 
Rule  by  promising  large  endowments  for  charitable 
foundations  for  their  constituents. 

The  third  proposal  has  many  advantages  to  recom- 
mend it.  First,  it  would  be  in  accordance  with  the 
statutes  of  the  time  of  Henry  H.,  when  Pope  Adrian 
issued  a  bull  by  which  the  King  of  Engltind  was  made 
Lord  of  Ireland,  and  tithes  were  granted  to  him. 

*  There  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt  of  the  authen- 
ticity of  this  document.  Baronius  published  it  from  the 
*  Codex  Vaticanus ; '  John  XXII.  has  annexed  it  to  his 

*  '  Post  and  Trcscnt  Policy  of  England  towards  Ireland,'  by  C. 
Grevillo,  p.  288. 

^  '  King  Henry  V.,'  act  ii.  scene  3. 


IRELAND.  261 

brief  addressed  to  Edward  II. ;  and  John  of  Salisbury 
states  distinctl}^  in  his  Metalogieus,  that  he  obtained  this 
bull  from  Adrian.  (^Metal.^  I.  4.)  ^  From  this  time 
(1154)  till  the  reign  of  Ehzabeth,  that  is  to  say,  for  four 
centuries,  we  must  suppose  that,  however  irregularly 
levied,  the  tithes  of  Ireland  were  appropriated  to  the 
Roman  Catholic  clergy  of  Ireland.  If  the  wovd^  plunder 
and  blunder  have  any  significance,  they  should  be  ap- 
plied, not  to  Mr.  Gladstone  and  his  Cabinet,  but  to 
Queen  Elizabeth  and  the  Protestant  Church  of  Ireland. 

The  endowment  of  the  Roman  Catholic  clergy  of 
Ireland  has,  therefore,  the  plea  of  antiquity  to  recom- 
mend it. 

It  has  likewise  its  accordance  with  the  character  of 
the  Irish  people ;  they  are  described  by  Mr.  Froude  as 
'  passionate  in  every  thing  ;  passionate  in  their  patriot- 
ism, passionate  in  their  religion.'  ^  He  likewise,  while 
with  the  spirit  of  a  severe  historian  he  pities  the  imper- 
fections of  their  character,  says  of  the  nation,  that  '  they 
appeal  to  sympathy  in  their  very  weakness,  and  they 
possess,  and  have  always  possessed,  some  qualities,  the 
moral  worth  of  which  it  is  impossible  to  over-estimate, 
and  which  are  rare  in  the  choicest  races  of  mankind.'  ^ 

If  such  is  the  moral  worth  of  the  Irish  people,  and 
if  they  are  passionate  in  their  attachment  to  religion,  it 
can  hardly  be  denied  that  a  large  provision  ought  to  be 
made  to  enable  the  parish  priests  to  attend  to  their 
spiritual  wants,  and  give  spiritual  comfort  on  those 
frequent  occasions  of  feasts  and  fasts,  of  illness  and  of 
worship,  when  the  Roman  Catholic  gentleman  and  the 

1  See  '  Illustrated  History  of  Ireland,'  p.  273.  *  Religious  History  of 
Ireland,'  by  James  Godkin. 

-  '  The  English  in  Ireland.'    Froude.     Vol.  i.  p.  23. 
»  Ibid.,  vol.  i.  p.  21. 


262  BECOLLECTIONS  AND   SUGGESTIONS. 

Roman  Catholic  peasant  alike  require  that  his  priest 
should  be  able  to  attend  him  easily  and  conveniently. 
The  priest  should  neither  have  a  long  distance  to  travel, 
nor  want  means  to  obtain  the  food  and  the  clothing 
necessary  for  his  maintenance.  I  will  quote  one  authoiity 
to  make  good  the  proposition  I  have  laid  down.  It  is 
tlie  deliberate  judgment  of  Dr.  Arnold.  His  large  and 
liberal  views  are  thus  explained  in  the  volume  of  his 
'  Life  and  Letters ' ;  — 

'I  think  that  a  Catholic  is  a  member  of  Christ's 
church  just  as  much  as  I  am,  and  I  could  well  endure 
one  form  of  that  Church  in  Ireland  and  in  England.  We 
are  suffering  here  from  that  accursed  division  among 
Christians  of  which  I  think  the  archfiend  must  be  the 
author.  The  good  Protestants  and  bad  Christians  have 
talked  nonsense  and  more  than  nonsense  so  long  about 
popery  and  the  beast  and  antichrist,  that  the  simple, 
just,  and  Christian  measure  of  establishing  the  Roman 
Catholic  Church  in  three-fifths  of  Ireland  seems  removed 
by  common  consent.  The  Protestant  clergy  ought  not 
to  have  their  present  revenues  in  Ireland ;  so  far  I  agree 
with  Lord  Grey,  but  not  in  a  narrow,  low,  economical 
view  of  their  pay  being  over-proportioned  to  their  work, 
but  because  church  property  is  one  of  the  most  sacred 
trusts  of  which  the  sovereign  power  in  the  church,  i.e., 
the  King  and  Parliament,  not  the  bishops  and  clergy,  is 
appointed  by  God  trustee.  It  is  a  property  set  apart 
for  the  advancement  of  direct  Christian  principles ; 
first,  by  furnishing  religious  comfort  and  instruction  to 
the  grown-up  part  of  the  i)opulation  ;  next,  by  furnish- 
ing the  same  to  the  young  in  the  shape  of  religious 
education.  Now  the  Christian  people  of  Ireland  have 
a  right  to  have  the  full  benefit  of  their  church  property, 
which  now  they  cannot  have,  because  Protestant  clergy- 


IRELAND.  263 

men  they  will  not  listen  to.  I  think,  then,  that  it  ought 
to  furnish  them  with  Catholic  clergymen.  ...  I  have 
one  great  principle  which  I  never  lose  sight  of,  to  insist 
strongly  on  the  difference  between  Christian  and  anti- 
Christian,  and  to  sink  into  nothing  the  difference  be- 
tween Christian  and  Christian.'  ^ 

I  should,  for  my  own  part,  object  very  strongly  to  the 
setting  up  of  a  Roman  Catholic  Church  establishment 
in  Ireland,  with  its  archbishops,  bishops,  and  deans,  its 
preposterous  pretensions,  and  its  ultramontane  doctrines ; 
but  the  Roman  Catholic  parish  priests  ought,  I  think,  to 
have  provided  for  each  of  them  a  manse  or  rectory,  with 
a  few  acres  of  land ;  in  short,  sufficient  pasture  for  a 
cow  or  a  horse.  That  we  should  confine  our  grants  to 
the  parochial  clergy  was  the  opinion  of  the  late  Mr. 
Tierney. 

Dr.  Arnold  was  not  the  first  person  who  perceived 
that  reasons,  even  stronger  than  those  I  have  men- 
tioned, exist  for  endeavoring  to  range  the  Roman  Cath- 
olic priesthood  on  the  side  of  peace  and  order.  Bishop 
Law,  a  man  of  great  comprehension  of  mind,  and  not 
less  liberality,  has  spoken  to  the  following  effect  of  the 
conduct  of  the  Roman  Catholic  priests  of  Ireland : 
'  The  almost  total  dependence  of  the  Roman  Catholic 
clergy  of  Ireland  upon  their  people  for  the  means  of 
subsistence  is  the  cause,  according  to  my  best  judgment, 
why,  upon  every  popular  commotion,  many  priests  of 
that  communion  have  been,  and,  until  measures  of  bet- 
ter policy  are  adopted,  always  will  be,  found  in  the  ranks 
of  sedition  and  opposition  to  the  established  Govei-n- 
ment.  The  peasant  will  love  a  revolution,  because  he 
feels  the  weight  of  poverty,  and  has  not  often  the  sense 

1  Dr.  Arnold's  '  Life  and  Letters/  vol.  i.  p.  382.  _^ 


264  RECOLLECTIONS  AND   SUGGESTIONS. 

to  perceive  that  the  change  of  masters  may  render  it 
lieavier ;  the  priest  must  follow  the  impulse  of  the  pop- 
ular wave,  or  be  left  behind  on  the  beach  to  perisli.'  ^ 

I  am  aware  that  there  are  many  obstacles  in  the  way 
of  an  endowment  for  the  parish  priests  of  the  Roman 
Catholic  Church  in  Ireland,  yet  the  reasons  in  its 
favor  are  exceedingly  strong.  They  may  be  thus 
summed  up  :  — 

1.  It  is  a  restoration  of  property  conferred  by 
Henry  II.  and  the  Pope  on  the  Roman  Catholic  Church 
of  Ireland.  2.  It  is  in  accordance  with  the  religion  of 
the  great  majority  of  the  people  of  Ireland.  3.  It 
would  relieve  the  farmers  and  peasants  of  Ireland  from 
very  heavy  demands.  4.  It  Avould  separate  the  Roman 
Catholic  clergy  from  all  sympathy  and  connivance  with 
the  Ribbon  confederacy,  and  give  the  best  hope  of 
checking  murder,  carried  on,  as  it  is  at  present,  in  the 
spirit  of  established  regular  criminal  law,  '  ut  poena  ad 
paucos,  metus  ad  omnes,  perveniat.' 

Thus  recommended,  it  is  to  be  hoped  that  some 
great  Minister,  or  some  wise  Parliament,  may  at  length 
provide  for  the  prospect  of  '  Hibernia  pacata.' 

I  now  come  to  my  fourth  proposition :  — 

That  the  Secretary  of  State  for  the  Home  Department 
of  Great  Britain  ought  to  have  in  Ireland  the  same 
authority  as  in  Scotland. 

In  order  to  place  in  contrast  the  two  systems,  it  will 
be  necessary  to  compare  the  government  of  Scotland 
from  1707  to  1829  with  the  government  of  Ireland  for 
a  similar  period. 

The  pr()i)osal  I  make  is  justified  by  the  course  which 
was  adopted  with  regard  to  Scotland  by  the  Union  of 

/ 

1  Plowden,  vol.  iii.  p.  716. 


POLICY  TO  SCOTLAND  AND  IRELAND.     265 

1707,  and  the  prodigious  success  of  the  policy  enforced 
by  that  Union. 

The  Union  of  Scotland  confirmed  in  the  most  solemn 
manner  the  establishment  of  a  National  Church  on  prin- 
ciples to  which  the  Scotch  nation  were  deeply  attached. 
Courts  of  justice  administered  laws  to  which  the  Scotch 
Parliament  had  given  its  assent.  The  distribution  of 
property,  which  had  been  made  with  the  assent  of  the 
nobility,  gentry,  and  commonalty  of  Scotland,  provided 
a  decent  though  frugal  maintenance  for  the  parochial 
ministers  of  the  National  Church,  for  the  repair  of  their 
dwellings,  and  the  means  of  education  for  the  poor, 
which  John  Knox  had  taken  care  should  include  relig- 
ious instruction,  in  which  he  and  the  majority  of  the 
people  of  Scotland  could  willingly  concur. 

The  administration  of  law  and  the  establishment  of 
a  religious  Avorship  agreeable  to  the  conscience  of  the 
people  being  thus -provided  for,  and  guaranteed  by 
special  enactments  binding  on  the  Sovereign,  Lord 
Somers  applied  the  resources  of  his  wisdom  to  the 
maintenance  of  order  and  liberty  by  the  Executive 
Government. 

A  strong  desire  was  entertained  to  preserve  the  Privy 
Council  of  Scotland,  and  to  place  in  the  hands  of  its 
members  powers  of  state  and  justice,  but  Lord  Somers, 
by  a  speech  in  the  House  of  Lords,  averted  the  mis- 
chiefs which  would  have  resulted  from  the  establishment 
of  two  political  administrations,  one  in  England  and 
another  in  Scotland.  The  following  notes  contain 
briefly  the  heads  of  the  speech  in  the  House  of  Lords 
made  by  this  great  statesman  :  '  True  concern  for  pre- 
serving the  public  peace.  Heartily  desirous  of  the 
Union.  No  less  desirous  to  make  it  entire  and  complete. 
Not  at  all  perfect  while  two  political  administrations 


266  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

subsist.  The  true  argument  for  the  Union  was  the 
danger  to  both  kingdoms  from  a  divided  state.  Prin- 
cipally hy  the  help  of  one  to  enslave  the  other^  and  to 
effect  another  sort  of  union.  The  advantage  of  Scotland 
is  to  have  the  same  easy  access  to  the  Prince,  to  be 
under  the  immediate  personal  care  of  the  Prince,  and 
not  to  owe  their  protection  and  countenance  to  any 
subordinate  institution.  This  was  my  argument  at  the 
Union.  Will  not  prevaricate.  Worse  state  after  the 
Union  if  a  distinct  Administration  continue.'  ^ 

The  policy  of  Lord  Somers  was  successful ;  the  seat 
of  government  was  placed  in  England,  and  the  govern- 
ment of  the  Church  was  confided  to  a  general  assembly 
composed  partly  of  the  ministers  of  the  '  Kirk '  and 
partly  of  lay  elders  popularly  elected. 

The  administration  of  justice  was  intrusted  to  the 
most  eminent  members  of  the  bar  of  Scotland  chcsen 
by  the  Crown. 

Thus  constituted,  the  government  of  Scotland  has 
withstood  most  dangerous  storms.  When  the  young 
Pretender  landed  in  Scotland,  in  1745,  the  destinies  of 
England  were  confided  to  two  ministers,  of  whom  it  was 
said  with  truth  and  wit,  that  the  one,  Lord  Carteret, 
made  a  trifle  of  every  difficulty,  and  the  other,  the  Duke 
of  Newcastle,  a  difficulty  of  every  trifle.  Yet  the  Low- 
Linders  of  Scotland  were  true  to  their  principles,  and 
they  had  in  President  Forbes  an  able  and  sagacious 
leader.  The  history  of  Scotland  from  the  time  of  the 
battle  of  Cuiloden  shows  that,  whether  in  her  manufact- 
uring towns,  as  Glasgow,  Paisley,  and  Dundee,  or  in 
her  agricultural  counties,  as  the  Lothians,  industry  has 
its  due  reward,   and  that  order  and  liberty  flourish 

i  Lord  Uardwicke's  '  State  Papers/  vol.  ii.  p.  478. 


SCOTLAND.  237 

together.  If  there  occurs  anywhere  in  Scotland  a  riot 
or  a  conspiracy,  the  Home  Secretary  is  prompt  to  direct 
the  forces  of  Great  Britain  to  the  diseased  part,  and 
every  one  relies  on  the  pacific  termination  of  the  dis- 
order. 

I  have  omitted  to  mention  one  blot  which  did  much 
to  diminish  the  merit  of  the  Union  between  Eno^land 
and  Scotland.  The  Parliamentary  representation  of 
Scotland  was  left  in  the  hands,  or  placed  in  the  hands, 
of  a  miserable,  monopolizing  minority,  as  odious  and  as 
exclusive  as  the  church  minority  which  deformed  the 
Union  between  Great  Britain  and  Ireland. 

A  few  owners  of  land  held,  under  the  title  of  supe- 
riorities, the  whole  Parliamentary  representation  of 
Scotland  in  their  hands.  The  supremacy  of  Dimdas 
and  his  followers  was  not  even  mitigated  by  the  in- 
fluence of  a  majority  of  numbers,  which  in  Ireland 
belonged  so  manifestly  to  the  Roman  Catholics,  as  to 
break  in  some  degree  the  tyranny  of  law.  Lord  Archi- 
bald Hamilton  was  almost  the  only  man  who  dared  in 
Parliament  to  raise  his  voice  in  the  cause  of  right  and 
justice.  During  the  early  days  of  the  French  War,  a 
lawyer  or  man  of  letters  who  spoke  against  the  excesses 
of  arbitrary  power  could,  if  a  lawj^er,  hardly  obtain  a 
brief ;  or  if  a  philosopher,  scarcely  use  his  literary  talent 
without  the  fear  of  being  oppressed  and  excluded  from 
the  legitimate  use  of  his  freedom  by  the  oppressive 
mandate  of  an  intolerant  majority.  Such  men  as  Mr. 
Jeffrey,  Mr.  Cockburn,  and  Mr.  Fletcher  were  the 
targets  at  which  all  the  arrows  of  exclusion,  of  abuse, 
and  of  calumny  were  directed.  One  lady,  the  wife  of 
Mr.  Fletcher,  was  said  to  keep  on  her  toilet  table  a 
miniature  guillotine,  with  which  she  slew  the  ducks  and 
chickens  for  her  husband's  table.     These  absurd  inven- 


268  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

tions  were  suited  to  the  prevailing  palate,  and  made  it 
difficult  for  Mr.  Fletcher  to  maintain  his  independence. 
This  tyranny  \vas  not  finally  overcome  till  Lord  Grey's 
accession  to  power  in  1830. 

I  have  seen  private  letters  which  have  been  pre- 
Berved  describing  the  enthusiasm,  the  popular  joy,  and 
the  sense  of  deliverance  from  the  yoke  of  Toryism 
v/hich  animated  the  crowds  of  Edinburgh  when  they 
welcomed  Mr.  Abercrombie  and  Mr.  Jeffrey,  or,  more 
properly,  James  Abercrombie  and  Francis  Jeffrey,  when 
they  were  elected  under  the  Reform  Act  as  members 
for  Edinburgh.  The  Dundases  had  been  as  intolerant, 
as  corrupt,  and  as  powerful  in  the  Scotch,  as  the  Beres- 
fords  in  the  Irish  community. 

I  am  allowed  to  copy  from  the  diary  of  Mrs.  Fletcher 
her  commemoration  of  the  triumph  of  political  liberty 
in  Scotland  ;  — 

'  It  was  during  that  winter,  1832-3,  that  the  hust- 
ings were  erected  for  the  first  time  at  the  cross  of 
Edinburgh  for  the  popular  election  of  the  membei*s 
for  the  city,  under  the  new  Reform  Bill.  I  often  took 
my  three  grandsons,  and  explained  to  them  how  their 
grandfather  and  father  would  have  rejoiced  to  see  that 
day,  for  the  sake  of  the  improvement  of  their  country, 
and  the  security  of  its  future  freedom. 

*At  length,  in  March,  1833,  came  the  day  of  elec- 
tion, and  we  were  kindl}'  invited  by  the  Lord  Advocate 
and  Mrs.  Jeffrey  to  their  house  in  Moray  Place,  to  see 
the  members  brought  home  in  triumph.  The  citizens 
of  Edinburgh  did  themselves  honor  in  choosing  two  such 
representatives  as  James  Abercrombie,  the  Speaker  of 
the  House  of  Commons,  and  Francis  Jeffrey,  then 
Lord  Advocate ;  men  not  less  eminent  for  their  talents 
than  for  their  public  spirit  and  com*age  in  supporting 


SCOTLAND. 


269 


the  cause  of  civil  and  religious  liberty,  both  in  and  out 
of  Parliament.  I  scarcely  felt  equal  to  go,  leaving 
Mary  alone  on  that  day  in  our  lodgings.  Our  kind 
Mrs.  Thompson  secretly  consulted  her  husband,  and 
came  with  a  cheery  face  early  in  the  day,  to  say  Dr. 
Thompson  allowed  his  patient  to  go  with  me  to  the 
chair  or  sofa  offered  her  near  the  window  by  Mrs. 
Jeffrey.  It  was  a  glorious  sight  for  us  to  see  these 
truly  honest  men  borne  home  amidst  the  acclamations 
of  tens  of  thousands  of  their  grateful  and  emancipated 
countrymen.  We  stood  by  them  on  the  balcony  of 
Mr.  Jeffrey's  house  while  the}^  sh9rtly  returned  thanks 
to  the  people.  Few  events  ever  excited  me  more  than 
those  which  took  place  in  Edinburgh  at  that  time.'  - 

While  it  must  be  said  of  Mr.  Fletcher  that  he  sacri- 
ficed the  honest  earnings  of  his  profession,  in  order  to 
maintain  the  independence  of  his  position,  and  preserve 
the  utterance  of  his  free  opinions  in  favor  of  civil  lib- 
erty in  the  worst  of  times,  it  must  be  also  recorded 
that  his  widow  Mrs.  Fletcher  never  bated  a  jot  of  heart 
or  hope  when  deprived  of  her  husband,  and  suffering 
many  afflictions  of  a  domestic  nature ;  she  was  still  one 
of  the  most  agreeable  members  of  society,  and  assem- 
bled Mr.  Jeffrey,  Mr.  Cockburn,  and  others  at  her 
evening  parties,  which  were  distinguished  amongst  the 
most  agreeable  resorts  of  the  literary  society  of  Edin- 
burgh. I  shall  always  remember  with  pleasure  the 
many  evenings  on  which,  with  Professor  Playfair  and 
others,  who  maintained  opinions  favorable  to  freedom, 
1  was  associated  with  those  parties. 

Let  us  now  turn  to  Ireland,  taking  the  period  from 
1708  to  1829. 

1  'Autobiography  of  Mrs.  Fletcher/  p.  181, privately  printed. 


2T0  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

The  Union  of  England  with  Scotland,  and  the  Union 
of  Great  Britain  and  Ireland  have  been  consolidated 
by  two  Acts  of  Union,  —  the  Act  of  Union  between 
England  and  Scotland,  passed  in  1708,  and  the  Act  of 
Union  between  Great  Britain  and  Ireland,  concluded 
in  1801. 

These  two  Acts  were  framed  upon  totally  different 
principles,  and  therefore  we  must  not  be  surprised, 
omitting  all  invidious  contrast  between  the  national 
characters  of  the  Scotch  and  the  Irish,  if  we  find  that 
the  result  has  been  totally  different.  While  the  Scotch 
Union  has  established  a  confirmation  of  the  Scotch 
National  Church,  and  the  maintenance  of  the  laws  and 
courts  of  justice  prevailing  in  Scotland  before  the 
Union,  and  while  Scotland  has  made  wonderful  prog- 
ress in  manufactures,  in  agriculture,  and  every  species 
of  industry,  the  picture  presented  by  Ireland  is  of  a  far 
less  agreeable  nature. 

After  the  Revolution  of  1688  in  England,  after  the 
battle  of  the  Boyne  and  the  battle  of  Aughrim,  the 
Irish  people  wished  to  devote  themselves  to  the  growth 
and  manufacture  of  wool.  The  soil  of  Ireland  is  es- 
pecially adapted  to  the  feeding  of  sheep  ;  the  price 
of  fleece-wool  in  Ireland,  in  1733,  was  fivepence,  of 
combed  wool,  twelvepence  a  pound.  In  France,  Irish 
fleece-wool  was  sold  for  two  shillings  and  sixpence  a 
pound;  combed  wool  from  four  shillings  and  sixpence 
to  six  shillings.  It  is  obvious  that  if  the  Irish  had 
been,  allowed  to  export  their  fleece  and  combed  wool 
to  France,  they  would  have  made  an  enormous  profit 
by  their  pastoral  industry,  and  the  anarchical  spirit 
would  have  been  vanquished.  What  stood  in  the  way 
of  these  benefits? — benefits  for  Ireland,  benefits  for 
England,  benefits  for  the  Empu*e?     Why  could  not 


IRELAND.  .  271 

the  Irish  build  manufacturing  towns,  and  erect  manu- 
factories of  cloth  in  competition  with  the  linen  manu- 
factories of  Belfast,  in  rivalry  of  the  towns  of  Leeds 
and  Halifax  in  England  ?  Was  it  the  anarchical  spirit 
of  the  Irish  ?  No.  When  the  Irish  rebels  with  their 
French  allies  had  been  vanquished  at  the  Boyne,  when 
James  had  gone  back  to  say  his  prayers  and  get  abso- 
lution at  St.  Germains,  the  English  Parliament,  instead 
of  making  a  flourishing  United  Kingdom,  prohibited, 
by  Act  of  Parliament  (the  9th  of  William  HI.)?  the 
direction  of  the  industry  of  the  Irish  to  the  manu- 
facture of  cloth,  and,  in  a  spirit  of  detraction  and  of 
selfishness,  resolved  to  build  on  the  poverty  of  Ireland 
the  supremacy  of  English  law  and  English  administra- 
tion. When  this  monopoly  had  gone  on  for  nearly  a 
century,  and  the  Irish,  deprived  of  a  fair  course  for 
their  industry,  had  resorted  to  illegal  trade  as  the  only 
defence  against  the  injustice  and  impolicy  of  England, 
Mr.  Hely  Hutchinson,  an  Irish  gentleman  of  noble 
family,  the  ancestor  of  the  peer  who  commanded  with 
distinction,  after  the  death  of  Sir  Ralph  Abercrombie, 
the  English  army  in  Egypt,  made,  in  1779,  the  fol- 
lowing statement  before  Lord  Harcourt,  the  Lord 
Lieutenant :  — 

'As  the  law  stands,'  he  said,  '  we  can  sell  our  wool 
and  woollen  goods  only  to  Great  Britain.  We  can  buy 
woollen  cloths  there  only.  If  such  a  law  related  to 
two  private  men  instead  of  two  kingdoms,  and  enjoined 
that  in  buying  and  selling  the  same  goods  one  individual 
should  deal  with  one  man  only  in  exclusion  of  others, 
it  would  in  effect  ordain  that  both  as  buyer  and  seller 
that  man  should  fix  his  own  price  and  profit,  and  would 
refer  to  his  discretion  the  loss  and  profit  of  the  other 
dealer.     You  have   defeated   your   own  object.      The 


272  TIECOLLECTIONS  AND   SUGGESTIONS. 

exclusion  of  Ireland  from  the  woollen  trade  has  been 
more  injurious  to  you  than  to  us.  One  pack  of  Irish 
wool  works  up  two  packs  of  French  wool.  The  French 
undersell  the  English,  and,  as  far  as  they  are  supplied 
with  Irish  wool,  the  loss  to  England  is  double  what  it 
would  be  if  the  Irish  exported  their  wool  manufactured^ 
...  As  to  the  practice  of  running  wool,  Ireland  has 
paid  to  Great  Britain  for  eleven  years  past  double  the 
sum  she  collects  from  the  whole  world  in  all  the  trade 
which  Great  Britain  allows  her — a  fact  not  to  be  par- 
alleled in  the  history  of  mankind.  Whence  did  all  this 
money  come  ?  Our  very  existence  is  dependent  on  our 
illicit  commerce.'  ^ 

Persons  of  all  ranks  in  Ireland  were  principals  or 
accomplices  in  smuggling.  '  Distinctions  of  creed  were 
obliterated,  and  resistance  to  law  became  a  bond  of 
union  between  Catholic  and  Protestant,  Irish  Celt  and 
English  colonist  —  from  the  great  landlord  whose  sheep 
roamed  in  thousands  over  the  Cork  mountains,  to  the 
ganger  who,  with  conveniently  blinded  eyes,  passed  the 
wool-packs  through  the  custom-house  as  butter  barrels ; 
from  the  magistrate  whose  cellars  were  filled  with  claret 
on  the  return  voyage  of  the  smuggling  craft,  to  the 
judge  on  the  bench  who  dismissed  as  frivolous  and  vex- 
atious the  various  cases  which  came  before  the  courts  to 
be  tried.'  ^ 

*  If  encountered  at  sea,  the  contraband  vessels  were 
sometimes  armed  so  heavily  that  the  government  cut- 
ters and  schooners  hesitated  to  meddle  with  them.  If 
unarmed  and  overhauled,  they  were  found  apparently 


1  *  Mr.  Hely  Hutclnnson  to  Lord  ITnrcourt,  July  1,  1770/  MSS.  Record, 
Office.    Froudc's  '  The  English  in  Ireland,'  vol.  i.  pp.  447-48. 
3  Froude's  '  The  Englieh  in  Ireland/  vol.  i.  pp.  448-49. 


BURKE.  273 

laden  with  some  innocent  cargo  of  salt  provisions.  The 
wool  was  pressed  with  screws  into  barrels,  which  were 
washed  with  brine,  that  they  might  pass  for  butter, 
herring,  or  salt  pork  casks.  The  more  determined  the 
authorities  showed  themselves,  the  more  resolute  were 
the  Irish,  the  lawlessness  and  wildness  of  the  trade  giv- 
ing it  fresh  zest.  Driven  from  the  Cork  warehouses, 
the  packs  were  stored  in  caves  about  the  islands  and 
cliffs  and  crags,  where  small  vessels  took  them  off  at 
leisure  ;  or  French  traders,  on  signal  from  shore,  sent  in 
their  boats  for  them.  Chests  of  bullion  were  kept  by 
the  merchants  at  Rochelle  and  Brest  to  pay  for  them  as 
they  were  landed.  When  the  French  Government  for- 
bade the  export  of  so  much  specie,  claret,  brandy,  and 
silks  were  shipped  for  Ireland  in  exchange  on  board  the 
vessels  which  had  brought  the  wool.'  ^  Mr.  Froude 
truly  declares  that  this  system  worked  the  extremity  of 
mischief  commercially,  socially,  and  politically ;  but, 
happily  for  the  political  and  commercial  evils  thus 
brought  upon  Ireland,  a  remedy  was  found. 

Two  men  of  extraordinary  genius,  both  Irishmen, 
were  about  this  time,  that  is,  in  1778,  taking  a  leading 
part  in  the  commercial  policy  of  England.  The  first  of 
these,  Edmund  Burke,  was  descended  from  a  family  long 
settled  in  the  south  of  Ireland.  He  was  born  in  the 
year  1730  ;  ^  in  1774  he  was  elected  one  of  the  repre- 
sentatives for  the  commercial  city  of  Bristol.  In  1778 
he  wrote  a  letter  to  '  Samuel  Span,  Esquire,  Master  of 
the  Society  of  Merchant  Adventurers  of  Bristol ;  '  his 
letter  related  to  resolutions  of  the  House  of  Commons 
somewhat  mitigating  the  exclusive  spirit  of  the  measures 


1  Froude's  '  The  English  in  Ireland/  vol.  i.  p.  450j 

2  '  Life  of  Edmund  Burke,'  by  Peter  Burke,  Esq. 

18 


274  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

framed  to  secure  the  monopoly  of  trade  and  manufact- 
ures to  England.  Burke  declared  in  his  letter  that  he 
considered  the  resolutions  merely  as  preparatory  of 
better  things,  as  a  means  of  showing  experimentally  that 
justice  to  others  is  not  always  folly  to  ourselves.  He 
went  on  to  say,  '  Too  little  dependence  cannot  be  had 
at  this  time  of  day  on  names  and  prejudices.  The  eyes 
of  mankind  are  opened,  and  communities  must  be  held 
together  by  an  evident  and  solid  interest.  God  forbid 
that  our  conduct  should  demonstrate  to  the  world  that 
Great  Britain  can,  in  no  instance  whatsoever,  be  brought 
to  a  sense  of  rational  and  equitable  policy  but  by  coercion 
and  force  of  arms.'  ^  Further,  '  Do  we  in  these  resolu- 
tions bestow  any  thing  upon  Ireland  ?  Not  a  shilling. 
We  only  consent  to  leave  to  them,  in  two  or  three 
instances,  the  use  of  the  natural  faculties  which  God  has 
given  to  them,  and  to  all  mankind.' 

In  a  later  passage,  Burke  asks :  '  How  much  have  you 
lost  by  the  participation  of  Scotland  in  all  your  commerce  ? 
The  external  trade  of  England  has  doubled  since  that 
period.'  He  adds,  *  Such  liberality  there  is  in  virtue  of 
sentiment  that  you  have  grown  richer  by  the  partner- 
ship of  poverty.' 

Finding  that  this  letter  had  no  success,  he  wrote  to 
two  gentlemen  of  Bristol,  who  had  lamented  that  he 
had  tajten  so^  decided  a  part  against  his  constituents.  In 
this  second  letter  he  declares,  'No  Government  ought 
to  own  that  it  exists  for  the  purpose  of  checking  the 
prosperity  of  its  people,  or  that  there  is  such  a  principle 
involved  in  its  policy.' ^ 

He  concludes  his  letter  with  the  following  paragmph : 


»  Burke's  Works,  vol.  iii.  pp.  212-18. 
»  Ibid.,  p.  226. 


BURKE.  .275 

'  It  is  very  unfortunate  that  we  should  consider  those  as 
rivals  whom  we  ought  to  regard  as  fellow-laborers  in  a 
common  cause.  Ireland  has  never  made  a  single  step 
in  its  progress  towards  prosperity  by  which  you  have 
not  had  a  share,  and  perhaps  the  greatest  share,  in  the 
benefit.  That  progress  has  been  chiefly  owing  to  her 
own  natural  advantages  and  her  own  efforts,  which,  after 
a  long  time,  and  by  slow  degrees,  have  prevailed  in  some 
measure  over  the  mischievous  systems  which  have  been 
adopted.  Far  enough  she  is  still  from  having  arrived 
even  at  an  ordinary  state  of  perfection;  and  if  our 
jealousies  were  to  be  converted  into  politics,  as  system- 
atically as  some  would  have  them,  the  trade  of  Ireland 
would  vanish  out  of  the  system  of  commerce.  But  be- 
lieve me,  if  Ireland  is  beneficial  to  you,  it  is  so  not  from 
the  parts  in  which  it  is  restrained,  but  from  those  in 
which  it  is  left  free,  though  not  left  unrivalled.  The 
greater  its  freedom,  the  greater  must  be  your  advantage. 
If  you  should  lose  in  one  way,  you  will  gain  in  twenty.'  ^ 
There  is  an  historical  reason  why  I  should  make  ccfni- 
ments  on  this  letter.  The  historical  reason  is,  that  in 
1771  Oliver  Goldsmith  WTote  of  Burke :  — 

Who,  bom  for  the  universe,  narrowed  his  mind. 
And  to  party  gave  up  what  was  meant  for  mankind. 

This  couplet  conveys  a  most  unjust  charge  against 
Burke.  In  1777,  he  wrote  a  public  letter  to  the  sheriffs 
of  Bristol  in  favor  of  concihation  to  America.  In  1778, 
he  wrote,  as  we  have  seen,  in  favor  of  granting  free 
trade  to  Ireland.  It  was  impossible  to  take  a  course 
more  opposed  to  national  and  commercial  prejudices,  or 
more  conducive  to  the  interests  of  mankind.      Gold- 

1  Burke's  Works,  vol.  iii.  pp.  227-28. 


276  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

smith,  on  the  other  hand,  was  a  Jacobite,  and  narrowed 
his  mind  in  the  Jacobite  vice. 

The  second  Irishman  to  whom  I  alluded  was  Henry 
Grattan.  Henry  Grattan  was  intended  for  the  bar,  but, 
by  the  influence  of  Lord  Charleraont,  was  elected  mem- 
ber for  Charlemont  in  the  place  of  Francis  Caulfield, 
Lord  Charlemont's  brother.  Grattan  was  born  in  1746, 
in  the  city  of  Dublin,  which  his  father  represented  in 
Parliament;  he  was  educated  at  the  University  of 
Dublin,  and  in  1767  was  entered  a  student  of  the 
Middle  Temple.  He  admired,  to  the  point  of  enthusi- 
asm, the  eloquence  of  Lord  Chatham,  and  more  than 
once  reported  his  speeches.  He  was  called  to  the  Irish 
Bar  in  1772.  The  first  speech,  of  which  we  have  any 
record  in  the  collection  of  his  speeches,  was  delivered 
in  1778;  in  1779,  in  the  Irish  Parliament,  he  moved  an 
amendment  to  the  address  to  the  King,  asking  for  free 
trade  for  Ireland.  The  Prime  Serjeant  (Mr.  Hussey 
Burgh)  and  Mr.  Flood,  in  order  to  secure  unanimity, 
moved,  *  That  we  beg  leave,  however,  humbly  to  repre- 
Bent  to  His  Majesty  that  it  is  not  by  temporary  ex- 
pedients, but  by  a  free  trade  alone,  that  this  nation  is 
now  to  be  saved  from  impending  ruin.*  This  was 
unanimously  adopted,  and  the  address,  with  this  amend- 
ment, was  agreed  to.  On  the  succeeding  day  it  was 
moved  by  Mr.  Conolly,  seconded  by  Mr.  Ponsonby,  and 
resolved  item,  con.,  '  That  the  thanks  of  this  House  be 
given  to  the  different  volunteer  corps  in  this  kingdom 
for  tliejr  spiiited  and  (at  this  time)  necessary  exertions 
in  its  defence.'^ 

The  formation  of  the  volunteers,  to  the  amount  of 
forty  thousand  armed  men,  showed  that  Ireland  was  in 

1  '  GrattaD'8  Speeches/  rol.  i.  p.  26. 


GRATTAN.  277 

earnest  in  asserting  her  rights.  In  April,  1782,  the 
volunteers  had  augmented  in  numbers  to  nearly  eighty 
thousand  men,  and  in  the  month  of  February  they  as- 
sembled at  a  convention  at  Dungannon,  to  take  into 
consideration  the  question  of  their  country's  freedom. 
The  three  most  important  resolutions  agreed  upon  were 
these :  — 

'  Resolved :  That  a  claim  of  any  body  of  men,  other 
than  the  King,  Lords,  and  Commons  of  Ireland,  to  make 
laws  to  bind  this  kingdom,  is  unconstitutional,  illegal, 
and  a  grievance. 

'  Resolved :  That  the  powers  exercised  by  the  Privy 
Council  of  both  kingdoms,  under,  or  under  color  or  pre- 
tence of,  the  law  of  Poynings,  are  unconstitutional  and 
a  grievance. 

'  Resolved  :  That  a  Mutiny  Bill,  not  limited  in  point 
of  duration  from  session  to  session,  is  unconstitutional 
and  a  grievance.^  ^ 

Ireland  had  at  length  been  driven  into  a  course  of 
armed  resistance  to  the  violent  and  tyrannical  conduct 
of  the  English  House  of  Commons  and  the  English 
Ministry,  which  nothing  but  resistance  could  overcome. 
At  the  same  time,  a  change  of  Ministry  took  place  in 
England,  and  Charles  Fox,  who  became  Secretary  of 
State,  introduced  into  the  British  House  of  Commons  a 
bill  to  repeal  the  6th  of  George  I.  Thus  was  effected 
without  bloodshed  a  great  revolution.  Ireland  ob- 
tained a  change  by  which  her  legislative  independence 
was  secured. 

Unhappily,  this  victory  was  not  fruitful  of  prosper- 
ity to  Ireland.     From  1772  to  1801  the  Parliament  of 

1  *  Grattan's  Speeches/  vol.  i.  p.  121. 


278  RECOLLECTIONS  AND   SUGGESTIONS. 

Ireland  was  remarkable  chiefly  for  intolerance  and 
corruption.  Grattan  iu  vain  endeavored  to  obtain 
for  the  Roman  Catholics,  who  formed  the  great  major- 
ity of  the  people  of  Ireland,  admission  to  the  privileges 
of  the  British  Constitution.  In  these  efforts  he  was 
not  supported  b}'^  Lord  Charlemont.  In  the  name  of 
Protestant  ascendency,  which  was  the  official  creed 
of  all  men  who  took  part  in  the  government  of  Ireland, 
a  grasping,  bigoted,  and  corrupt  junto  upheld  a  mo- 
nopol}^  more  narrow,  more  unjust,  and  more  injuiious  to 
the  Commonwealth  than  any  of  those  which,  in  her 
last  days,  Queen  Elizabeth  had  surrendered. 

We  have  now  to  consider  what  was  the  new  system 
established  by  George  III.  and  Mr.  Pitt  at  the  begin- 
ning of  the  nineteenth  century.  In  order  to  introduce 
that  system,  the  Protestants  of  Ireland  were  bought 
with  honors  and  with  money,  the  Roman  Catholics 
of  Ireland  were  deceived  and  betrayed.  Lord  Corn- 
wallis,  who,  as  a  loj^al  man,  was  bound  to  carry  into 
effect  the  will  of  his  Sovereign,  said  he  was  obliged  to 
pay  compliments  to  men  whom  he  should  like  to  kick. 
A  more  disgusting,  process  than  the  transactions  con- 
nected with  the  Irish  Union  could  not  well  be.  Mr. 
Pitt,  indeed,  not  only  held  out  hopes  to  the  Roman 
Catholics  of  Ireland,  but  sincerely  wished  to  give  effect 
to  tliose  hopes  ;  he  no  doubt  reckoned  that  having  been 
more  than  sixteen  years  at  the  head  of  the  councils  of 
the  King,  having  a  decided  majority  in  the  two  Houses 
of  Parliament,  the  advice  he  should  be  prepared  to  give 
his  Sovereign,  in  order  to  unite  the  hearts  of  his  people 
in  the  throes  and  struggles  of  a  great  war,  would  be 
accepted.  Mr.  Pitt  was  entirely  mistaken.  The  King's 
answer  was  in  these  words :  — r 


» 


GEORGE   III.  AND  MR.  PITT.  279 

*  Queen's  House,  February  1,  1801. 
'  I  should  not  do  justice  to  the  warm  impulse  of  my 
heart  if  I  entered  on  the  subject  most  unpleasant  to  my 
mind  Avithout  first  expressing  that  the  cordial  affection 
I  have  for  Mr.  Pitt,  as  well  as  high  opinion  of  his 
talents  and  integrity,  greatly  add  to  my  uneasiness  on 
this  occasion ;  but  a  sense  of  religious  as  well  as  polit- 
ical duty  has  made  me,  from  the  moment  I  mounted 
the  throne,  consider  the  oath  that  the  wisdom  of  our 
forefathers  has  enjoined  the  Kings  of  this  realm  to  take 
at  their  Coronation,  and  enforced  by  the  obligation  of 
instantly  following  it  in  the  course  of  the  ceremony 
with  taking  the  Sacrament,  as  so  binding  a  religious 
obligation  on  me  to  maintain  the  fundamental  maxims 
on  which  our  Constitution  is  placed,  namely,  the  Church 
of  England  being  the  established  one,  and  that  those 
who  hold  employments  in  the  State  must  be  members 
of  it,  and  consequently  obliged,  not  only  to  take* oaths 
against  Popery,  but  to  receive  the  Holy  Communion 
agreeably  to  the  rites  of  the  Church  of  England.  This 
principle  of  duty  must,  therefore,  prevent  me  from 
discussing  any  proposition  tending  to  destroy  this 
groundwork  of  our  happy  Constitution,  and  much  more 
so  that  now  mentioned  by  Mr.  Pitt,  which  is  no  less 
than  the  complete  overthrow  of  the  whole  fabric.  When 
the  Irish  propositions  were  transmitted  to  me  by  a 
joint  message  from  both  Houses  of  the  British  Parlia- 
ment, I  told  the  lords  and  gentlemen  sent  on  that 
occasion  that  I  would  with  pleasure  and  without  delay 
forward  them  to  Ireland  ;  but  that,  as  individuals,  I 
could  not  help  acquainting  them  that  my  inclination  to 
a  Union  with  Ireland  was  principally  founded  on  a  trust 
that  the  uniting  the  Established  Churches  of  the  two 


280  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

kingdoms  would  for  ever  shut  the  door  to  any  further 
measures  with  respect  to  the  Roman  Catholics.'  ^ 

The  consequences  of  this  declaration  on  the  part  of 
George  III.  was  the  resignation  of  Mr.  Pitt,  Lord 
Grenville,  Mr.  Dundas,  Lord  Spencer,  Mr.  Windham, 
and  Mr.  Canning;  the  defeat  of  the  hopes  which  the 
Roman  Catholics  of  Ireland  had  entertained ;  and  the 
postponement  of  Roman  Catholic  Emancipation  till 
1829. 

Fox,  Pitt,  and  Burke  were  three  of  the  ablest  men 
who  have  applied  their  minds  to  the  administration  of 
England  and  Ireland.  Fox  and  Burke  made  two  im- 
mense mistakes  when  they  coalesced  with  Lord  North, 
and  proposed  a  government  of  India  with  party  views. 
Mr.  Pitt  made  a  blunder  of  no  less  importance  and 
more  fatal  when,  in  1804,  he  surrendered  to  the  King 
his  own  project  of  a  coalition.  I  will  give  here  a  note 
of  a  combined  Administration,  recorded  by  Lord  Stan- 
hope, as  planned  by  Mr.  Pitt  in  May,  180-A :  — 

Treasury Mr.  Pitt. 

r  Lord  Melville. 
Secretaries  of  State <  Mr.  Fox. 

(  Lord  Fitzwilliam. 

Admiralty Lord  Spencer. 

Lord  President Lord  Grenville. 

Privy  Seal Duke  of  Portland. 

Lord  Chancellor Lord  Eldon. 

M.  General  of  Ordnance    ....     Lord  Chatliam. 

Chancellor  of  Duchy Mr.  Windham. 

Board  of  Control Lord  Castlereagh. 

Lord  Steward Lonl  Camden. 

Committee  of  Trade T^rd  Ilarrowby. 

Secretary  at  War Mr.  Grey. 

Secretary  to  Ireland Mr.  Canning. 

1  Stanhope's  *  Life  of  Pitt/  vol.  iii.  App.  28, 29. 


# 


PITT'S  PLAN  OF  COALITION.  281 

It  may  safely  be  said,  that  never  in  difficult  circum- 
stances was  there  so  bright  a  prospect  of  a  strong 
Ministry,  for  all  the  foreign  and  domestic  interests  of 
England,  as  at  the  hour  when  the  project  of  Mr.  Pitt 
was  laid  before  the  King  of  England.  Fox,  although 
he  afterwards  observed  that  he  would  not  have  served 
under  Pitt,  had,  in  reality,  only  two  conditions  on 
which,  in  his  letters  to  his  friends,  he  would  have  in- 
sisted—  one,  that  a  coalition  was  clearly  right;  the 
other,  that  no  mediocrities  should  be  admitted  into  the 
Cabinet.  Pitt,  after  his  interview  with  the  King, 
humbly  declared  that  he  had  never  been  so  vanquished. 
Yet,  in  fact,  there  never  was  an  argument  so  weak  as 
that  which  George  III.  opposed  to  him.  He  reminded 
Pitt  that  he  had  himself  proposed  to  exclude  Fox  from 
the  Privy  Council ;  but  the  only  ground  for  that  exclu- 
sion was,  that  Fox  had  put  forward  as  an  abstract 
theory  the  sovereignty  of  the  people.  The  real  ground 
of  difference  between  Pitt  and  Fox  had  arisen  from 
the  democracy  of  France.  From  the  moment  when 
Napoleon  Bonaparte  became  First  Consul,  all  danger  of 
democracy  in  France  had  disappeared,  and  a  despotism, 
resting  upon  a  military  dictator,  whether  under  the 
name  of  First  Consul  or  Emperor,  was  a  form  of  gov- 
ernment against  which  Pitt  and  Fox  would  with  equal 
spirit  and  equal  abhorrence  have  contended.  Burke 
had  said  of  Lord  Chatham,  that  a  peep  into  the  King's 
closet  intoxicated  him ;  and  Lord  Chatham's  son,  with 
all  his  abilities  and  all  his  eloquence,  seems  to  have 
been  subject  to  a  similar  intoxication.  Had  Fox  been 
at  the  Foreign  Office  in  1804,  Austria  would  not  have 
been  hurried  into  war,  the  battle  of  Austerlitz  would 
not  have  been  fought,  and  Pitt  would  not  have  died  in 
1806.     Pitt  and  Fox  would  have  a^eed  not  to  force  on 


* 


282  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

the  Catliolic  question,  and,  in  1810,  the  policy  of  those 
two  great  men  would  have  prevailed  in  Ireland.  What 
actually  happened  was  very  different. 

In  January,  1806,  Pitt  died.  In  September  of  the 
same  year  Fox  died.  George  III.  said  to  his  daughter, 
the  Princess  Mary,  afterwards  Duchess  of  Gloucester, 
who  told  it  to  me,  that  he  never  thought  he  should 
have  regretted  the  death  of  Fox  so  much  as  he  found 
he  did.  In  the  following  year  a  very  moderate  proposal 
with  respect  to  the  army  was  made  by  Lord  Grenville's 
Ministry.  Not  only  did  the  King  reject  this  proposal, 
but  he  made  a  demand  inconsistent  with  the  Constitu- 
tion. 

'  He  required  an  assurance,  in  writing,  from  the 
Ministers,  that  they  would  never  press  upon  him  in 
future  any  measure  connected  with  the  Catholic  ques- 
tion ; '  in  other  words,  that  his  advisers  would  never 
give  him  advice  upon  one  great  and  important  branch 
of  public  affairs,  involving  in  their  opinion  the  charac- 
ter and  '  even  the  safety  of  the  Empire.'  ^ 

This  condition  implied  that  not  even  in  the  imme- 
diate prospect  of  civil  war — a  prospect  that  made  the 
Duke  of  Wellington  advise  his  Sovereign  to  yield  — 
would  the  Minister  give  any  advice  respecting  the 
Roman  Catholic  question. 

Of  course  neither  Lord  Grenville  nor  Loixl  Spencer, 
neither 'Lord  Holland  nor  Lord  Fitzwilliam,  neither 
Mr.  Grey  nor  Lord  Henry  Petty  could  assent  to  such 
degrading  terms.  The  Ministers  resigned  ;  and  not  till 
twenty-three  years  afterwards  did  any  of  the  Ministers 
of  that  day,  with  the  exception  of  Lord  Sidmouth,  enter 
the  Cabinet. 

1  '  Memoirs  of  the  Whig  Party.*    Lord  Holland.    Vol.  ii.  p.  208. 


IRELAND.  283 

'  The  No  Popery  '  cry  of  1807,  and  the  general  elec- 
tion of  that  year,  was  the  proceeding  most  discredit- 
able to  the  English  people  of  any  that  has  occurred 
in  my  time.  Several  of  the  ablest  men  in  Parliament, 
the  chief  ornaments  of  the  House  of  Commons,  were 
obliged  to  take  refuge  in  small  boroughs.  Mr.  Grey, 
then  Lord  Howick,  went  from  Northumberland  to 
Appleby  ;  Mr.  Windham  went  from  Norwich  to 
Romney. 

Mr.  Perceval  was  the  author  of  the  'No  Popery* 
cry,  and  did  his  utmost  to  arouse  the  people  to  relig- 
ious hatred. 

The  flame  did  not  subside  till  1829,  when  O'Connell 
agitated  the  people  of  Ireland  to  assemble  in  their 
thousands,  and  impressed  upon  the  Duke  of  Wellington 
the  fear  of  civil  war. 

In  1829,  the  Catholic  claims  were  granted,  and  from 
that  time  till  1868  it  was  the  object  of  the  advisers  of 
the  Crown  of  England  to  increase  the  privileges  and 
promote  the  happiness  of  the  people' of  Ireland.  This 
has  been  well  stated  by  Lord  Mayo,  in  his  speech  of 
1868  ;  but  any  one  who  knows  the  history  of  national 
feelings  must  be  aware  that  long  and  fatal  injuries  are 
not  forgiven  till  after  many  years  of  conciliation  and 
repentance.  The  wound  still  rankles,  the  injuries  are 
still  remembered,  and  the  stronger  the  feelings  of  the 
nation,  the  deeper  the  wound  and  the  longer  the  cure. 
It  is  acknowledged  by  Lord  Mayo  himself,  that  in  1868 
the  hostile  feelings  of  the  Irish  people  against  English 
government  were  not  changed  ;  yet,  he  says,  '  Professor 
Ingram  has  truly  remarked,  that  changes  so  great,  and 
made  within  so  short  a  period,  constitute  the  largest 
peaceful  revolution  in  the  history  of  the  world.'  ^ 

1  Lord  Mayo's  Speech  on  the  state  of  Ireland,  March  10,  1868. 


284  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

Yet  the  Union  with  Ireland  preserved  and  crystal- 
lized some  of  the  worst  wrongs  which  had  aggravated 
the  miseries  of  conquest. 

One  of  these  wrongs  was  the  Protestant  Church 
establishment.  I  have  seen  a  letter  written  by  one  of 
the  descendants  of  the  conquerors,  himself  the  owner 
of  a  large  landed  estate,  which  contained  the  advice  of 
the  writer  to  his  Sovereign  Queen  Elizabeth.  He  says 
that  there  were  two  ways  in  which  the  Irish  people 
could  be  governed ;  the  one  was  by  extirpating  all  the 
Roman  Catholics  in  the  country ;  the  other,  the  conver- 
sion of  all  the  Roman  Catholics  to  the  Protestant  relig- 
ion. The  writer  says  that  the  Queen  is  too  humane 
and  too  tender  to  adopt  the  first  method,  he  therefore 
recommends  the  second. 

The  second  was,  in  fact,  the  mode  adopted,  but  it 
entirely  failed.  After  three  hundred  years  of  trial,  not 
above  one-seventh  or  one-eighth  of  the  people  of  Ireland 
were  Protestants  of  the  Established  Church.  In  1867, 
when  Mr.  Gladstone  and  I  were  both  in  Italy,  I  ascer- 
tained the  opinions  and  sentiments  of  Mr.  Gladstone 
upon  this  important  subject.  I  found  that  he  was  as 
little  disposed  as  I  was  to  maintain  Protestant  ascen- 
dency in  Ireland;  and  from  that  time  I  judged  that 
this  great  question  would  be  safer  in  his  hands  than  in 
mine.  This  last  observation  requires  some  develop- 
ment. 

In  1838,  when  Lord  Melbourne  told  me  that  all  tlie 
members  of  the  Cabinet  wished  me  to  take  the  lead  of 
the  Liberal  party  in  the  House  of  Commons,  I  willingly 
consented  to  do  so. 

The  question  of  the  maintenance,  diminution,  or 
abolition  of  the  Protestant  EstabUshed  Church  in  Ire- 
land had  long  attracted  my  attention.     Upon  this  ques- 


MR.   GLADSTONE.  285 

tion,  in  1835,  I  had  overthrown  the  Administration  of 
Sir  Robert  Peel.  I  was  of  opinion  that  unless  some 
great  change  was  made  in  the  Established  Church, 
justice  to  Ireland  could  not  be  done.  I  was  not,  indjeed, 
in  1869,  physically  equal  to  a  much  longer  continuance 
of  the  labor  imposed  upon  a  leader  of  the  House  of 
Commons.     But  there  was  a  further  consideration. 

My  political  character  is  very  much  the  reverse  of 
that  which  Sydney  Smith,  in  an  angry  temper  and  a 
witty  mood,  attributed  to  me.  I  never  was  ready  either 
to  take  the  command  of  the  Channel  fleet  or  to  behold 
the  loss  of  that  fleet  with  equanimity.  My  disposition 
has  always  been  favorable  to  compromise  and  modera- 
tion, r  had  acted  in  that  temper  on  this  very  subject 
of  the  Irish  Church.  I  had  listened  to  Lord  Lansdowne, 
who  had  maintained  that  if  any  property  was  taken 
from  the  Church  of  Ireland  it  should  not  amount  to  the 
whole  of  that  property,  and  should  be  given  to  some 
kindred  purpose,  such  as  that  of  education. 

I  felt,  however,  that  boldness,  which,  according  to 
Lord  Bacon,  is  the  first  quality  of  a  statesman,  was  re- 
quired as  the  primary  quality  for  dealing  with  the  Irish 
Church,  and  that  no  man  could  dispute  the  pre-eminence 
in  that  quality  of  Mr.  Gladstone. 

I  knew  that  Mr.  Gladstone  had  an  eloquence  equal 
to  that  of  Mr.  Canning,  and  I  believed  that  he  was  en- 
dowed with  integrity  fit  to  be  compared  with  that  of 
Lord  Althorp.  I  knew  that  Mr.  Gladstone  was  .pre- 
pared to  take  a  large  and  liberal  view  of  the  question 
of  the  Irish  Church ;  to  him,  therefore,  I  was  ready  to 
transfer  the  mantle  which  I  had  worn  for  thirty  years. 
I  have  only  one  remark  to  add  to  my  estimate  of  the 
qualities  of  the  late  Prime  Minister.  I  was  not  wrong 
in  attributing  to  him  eloquence  equal  to  that  of  Mr. 


286  RECOLLECTIONS  AND   SUGGESTIONS. 

Canning,  and  integrity  on  a  par  with  that  of  Lord 
Althorp.  But  I  had  omitted  in  my  observation  one 
important  quality.  Lord  Macaulay  says  of  WiUiam 
Lor^  Russell,  and  his  influence  in  the  House  of  Com- 
mons :  '  He  had  long  exercised  there  an  influence 
resembling  the  influence  which,  within  the  memory 
of  this  generation,  belonged  to  the  upright  and  benevo- 
lent Althorp  ;  an  influence  derived,  not  from  superior 
skill  in  debate  or  in  declamatioa,  but  from  spotless  in- 
tegrit}^  from  plain  good  sense,  and  from  that  frank- 
ness, that  simplicity,  that  good  nature,  which  are 
singularly  graceful  and  winning  in  a  man  raised  by 
birth  and  fortune  high  above  his  fellows.'  ^  So  it  was 
of  Lord  Althorp ;  it  was  his  fearless  frankness  which, 
above  all,  gave  him  the  confidence  of  the  House  of 
Commons.  He  was  not  afraid  to  call  a  spade  a  spade, 
and  make  his  hearers  understand,  in  a  few  plain  words, 
the  policy  he  meant  to  pursue.  In  that  quality  Mr. 
Gladstone  is  greatly  his  inferior. 

In  defining  the  policy  to  be  adopted  by  the  nation 
with  regard  to  the  Irish  Established  Church,  there 
were  two  objects  to  be  considered.  One  was,  the  dis- 
position to  be  made  of  the  property  and  privileges  of 
the  Church  ;  the  other,  the  use  to  be  made  of  the  prop- 
erty, whether  the  amount  were  large  or  small,  after 
the  expiry  of  the  life-interests  of  the  existing  Protes- 
tant clergy. 

\Yith  respect  to  the  first  of  these  objects,  nothing 
conld  be  more  wise  or  more  complete  than  the  demon- 
stration of  Mr.  Gladstone.  The  Irish  Protestant  Church 
had  been  from  its  beginning  in  the  reign  of  Elizabeth 
foreign  to  the  soil,  ill-planted  and  ill-nurtured,  a  scare- 

1  Macaulay's  'History  of  England/  vol.  iii. 


SIR  JAMES  MACKINTOSH.    .  287 

crow  rather  than  a  tree,  a  fountain  of  bitterness  and 
animosity  rather  than  a  fertilizing  stream.  Mr.  Glad- 
stone illustrated  most  happily  the  fall  of  such  a  Church 
by  the  fall  of  Lear,  when  he  thinks  himself  falling 
down  a  precipice,  and  is,  in  fact,  only  throwing  himself 
down  on  the  flat  ground  on  which  he  stands. 

The  second  object  was  the  wise  and  judicious  dis- 
posal of  the  revenues  which  the  total  destruction  of 
the  Church  of  Ireland  would  place  within  his  reach. 
But  this  matter  has  been  already  elucidated. 

What  I  have  here  to  ask  is,  whether  the  time  has 
not  arrived  for  placing  in  the  Home  Department  in 
Whitehall  the  administration  of  the  internal  govern- 
ment of  Ireland?  Whether  the  evils  which  Lord 
Somers  foresaw  would  have  happened  to  England  and 
Scotland  if  separate  administrations  had  been  granted 
to  them,  have  not  actually  happened  to  Ireland? 
Whether  there  is  any  reason  for  refusing  to  the  Irish 
people  the  -benefits  of  English  rule  ? 

I  remember  that,  in  1819,  after  the  Manchester 
meeting,  known  by  the  name  of  Peterloo,  I  was  stay- 
ing in  the  house  of  Sir  James  Mackintosh,  in  the  coun- 
try. We  read  every  day  in  the  newspapers  accounts 
of  meetings ;  it  was  generally  stated  that  the  meeting 
at  Manchester,  although  legal,  had  been  attacked  and 
dispersed  by  military  force.  Sir  James  said  to  me,  '  It 
will  be  worth  while  to  look  at  my  law-books  and  see 
wdi ether  this  assumption  that  the  meeting  at  Manches- 
ter was  legal  is  founded  in  law.'  We  soon  found  rea- 
son to  conclude  that  the  Manchester  meeting  was  an 
illegal  meeting.  Sir  James  Mackintosh  and  I  agreed 
that  in  the  approaching  session  of  Parliament  we  would 
not  affirm  the  legality  of  the  Manchester  meeting. 
Accordingly,  when  the  prisoners  arrested  at  Manches- 


288  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

ter  were  brought  to  trial,  Mr.  Justice  Bailey  and  Chief 
Justice  Tinclal  pointed  out,  in  the  clearest  terms  and 
on  the  highest  authorities,  the  circumstances  which 
made  the  meeting  an  illegal  one. 

Yet  only  two  years  ago,  a  meeting  was  held  in  the 
neighborhood  of  Belfast,  marked  by  similar  illegalities 
in  a  far  more  offensive  form ;  and  it  seems  never  to 
have  occurred  to  the  Irish  Government  that  they  had 
permitted,  with  the  most  insulting  publicity  and  with 
the  most  disastrous  consequences,  that  which  had  called 
down  the  censure  of  Mr.  Justice  Bailey  and  Lord 
Chief  Justice  Tindal.  A  year  after,  Mr.  Justice  Law- 
son  pointed  out,  amid  the  ruins  of  houses,  and  after 
many  wounds  had  been  given  and  suffered  on  both 
sides,  the  illegality  of  the  Belfast  meeting. 

Now,  I  ask,  why  is  not  the  power  and  the  duty  of 
maintaining  internal  peace  in  Ireland  transferred  to 
our  present  Home  Secretary,  who,  by  his  answer  respect- 
ing tlie  condemned  Fenians,  has  given  promise  that  he 
will  not  go  to  sleep  over  his  charge  ?  I  may  add  here 
that  this  was  the  change  recommended  in  1850  by  Sir 
Robert  Peel. 

I  should  say,  at  the  same  time,  that  while  it  is  the 
duty  of  England  to  preserve  internal  peace  in  Ireland, 
she  is  bound  to  look  with  regret  to  lier  four  hundred 
years,  from  1480  to  1829,  during  which  period  she  did 
every  thing  in  her  power  to  check  the  industry,  to  re- 
press i\u)  manufactures,  to  persecute  the  religion,  and 
to  confiscate  the  rights  of  the  Irish  people. 

It  has  been  said  and  repeated  that  the  spirit  of 
anarchy  in  Ireland  is  so  inherent  in  the  people  that  it 
is  im[)ossible  to  subdue  it. 

But  we  have  seen  that  the  government  of  Scotland 
from  1707  to  1829  was  guided  by  political  wisdom  and 


POLICY  AFTER  THE  UNION  WITH  IRELAND.       289 

by  civil  and  religions  liberty,  while  the  review  of  the 
government  of  Ireland  from  1707  to  1829  shows  it 
to  have  been  directed  by  commercial  jealousy,  by  po- 
litical corruption,  and  by  religious  intolerance.  Is  it, 
then,  so  certain  that  the  nature  of  the  two  races  makes 
the  one  incapable  of  submitting  to  government,  and 
the  other  tranquil  and  obedient  ?  Maj^  it  not  be  that 
such  different  prescriptions  —  political  wisdom  with  civil 
and  religious  liberty  to  the  one,  and  political  corrup- 
tion with  commercial  jealousy  and  religious  intolerance 
to  the  other  —  may  have  caused  the  difference  ? 

I  now  arrive  at  my  sixth  proposition,  viz.,  ' "  Home 
Rule  "  must  be  refused  in  as  peremptory  a  manner  as 
repeal  of  the  Union  was  rejected  by  Lord  Grey  and 
Lord  Althorp  in  1830.'  I  should  have  been  very  glad 
if  the  leaders  of  popular  opinion  in  Ireland  had  so  modi- 
fied and  mollified  their  demand  for  '  Home  Rule  '  as  to 
make  it  consistent  with  the  unity  of  the  Empire.  There 
can  be  no  doubt  that  the  existing  legislation  by  Private 
Bills  is  exceedingly  cumbrous  and  expensive  ;  that  great 
funds  are  wasted  in  purchasing  private  interests,  and  in 
giving  fees  to  lawyers  for  services  Avhich  are  neither 
conducive  to  the  public  good  nor  advantageous  to  prop- 
erty. It  would  have  been  a  great  advantage  in  light- 
ening the  labors  of  Parliament,  and  in  promoting  useful 
public  legislation,  if  the  rural  parts  of  England,  Scotland, 
and  Ireland  had  been  divided  and  distributed  into  munic- 
ipalities springing  from  a  popular  origin,  and  invested 
with  local  powers.  The  principle  of  our  Constitution, 
that  no  taxes  or  rates  should  be  levied  except  by  popular 
consent,  is  grossly  violated  by  the  raising  of  large  sums 
by  virtue  of  the  orders  of  magistrates,  named  by  the 
Crown  upon  the  advice  of  the  Lord  Chancellor.  The 
Private  Bills  of  Lords  and  Commons  do  not  violate  this 

19 


290  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUQGESTIONS. 

principle,  but  are  in  many  instances  ver}'  costly.  The 
late  Mr.  Brassey  was  enabled  to  construct  a  railway 
from  Turin  to  the  Alps  at  no  greater  expense  than  was 
incurred  in  carrying  a  bill  through  Parliament  to  sanc- 
tion the  Great  Northern  Railway  of  England. 

It  is,  however,  useless  at  present  to  discuss  the  project 
of  provincial  corporations.  The  favorers  of  '  Home  Rule  * 
in  Ireland  have  declared  very  distinctly  that  what  they 
propose  is  to  convert  the  legislative  Union  of  England, 
Scotland,  and  Ireland  into  a  federal  Government,  on  the 
model  of  the  old  Republic  of  Holland,  or  the  modern 
federal  union  of  the  United  States  of  America. 

This  would  be  to  open  a  source  of  civil  war  over 
England  and  Ireland,  not  against  law,  but  by  virtue 
of  law,  owing  its  authority  to  the  Imperial  Parliament 
itself. 

No  matter  how  well  devised  the  restrictions  which 
might  be  framed  to  prevent  the  province  of  Ireland  en- 
croaching on  the  centralpower,  the  earliest  efforts  of  a 
popular  demagogue  at  Dublin  would  be  directed  to  the 
enlargement  of  local  privileges,  to  the  absorption  of  one 
part  after  another  of  the  central  authority  by  the  local 
assemblies.  The  taxes,  the  poor-rates,  the  funds  for 
education,  the  private  property  consecrated  by  the  Act 
of  Settlement,  the  right  of  Protestants  to  their  churches 
and  chapels,  nay,  the  privileges  of  Protestants  to  enjoy 
their  own  places  of  worship  and  their  own  religious  cer- 
emonies, would  all  be  matters  of  dispute,  and  the  *  Home 
Rulers,'  to  whom  Great  Britain  would  have  given  power, 
would  then  throw  in  the  teeth  of  their  partners  in  Lon- 
don the  concessions  which  had  been  made  by  themselves. 

I  own  I  can  see  no  hope  that  Ireland  would  be  well 
and  quietly  governed  under  the  dispensiition  of  *  Home 
Rule.'      In   my   opinion,   the    prLsonei-s    convicted   of 


HOME  RULE.  291 

treason-felony  under  the  rule  of  Lord  Kimberley  and 
the  Duke  of  Abercorn  were  too  easily  let  off  by  the 
Cabinet  of  Mr.  Gladstone.  But  peace  was  not  thereby 
obtained.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  policeman 
murdered  at  Manchester  was  slaughtered,  not  from 
private  malice,  but  for  the  sake  of  obtaining  impunity 
for  high  treason.  Thereupon  it  was  alleged  that  the 
murder  was  a  political  offence,  and  as  such  entitled  to 
indemnity.  How  could  we  expect  that  there  would  be 
peace  and  harmony  between  two  assemblies,  one  of 
which,  in  Ireland,  would  assert  the  right  to  impunity, 
and  the  other,  in  London,  which  would  look  to  punish- 
ment as  the  retribution  for  murder  ?  It  will  be  as  well, 
therefore,  that  we  should  look  to  the  declarations  of 
Lord  Grey  and  Lord  Althorp,  when  Mr.  O'Connell  de- 
manded the  repeal  of  the  Union  as  a  compliance  with 
his  petition  for  justice  to  Ireland.  Lord  Althorp  said 
on  that  occasion  that  he  could  not  agree  to  the  repeal 
of  the  Union,  as  he  considered  it  a  dismemberment  of 
the  Empire. 

Lord  Grey  as  openly  and  firmly  declared  that  he 
might  support  the  Union  on  the  ground,  '  quod  fieri 
non  debuit  factum  valet ; '  but,  without  availing  himself 
of  that  plea,  that  he  gave  his  unhesitating  and  uncom- 
promising adherence  to  the  Act  of  Union. 

Let  me  here  assert  that  there  can  be  no  greater 
mistake  in  the  government  of  Ireland  than  to  yield  upon 
points  where  justice  is  against  the  popular  demand.  I 
have  said  that  the  Irish  have  a  character  rather  resem- 
bling that  of  the  French  than  that  of  the  English  nation. 
At  all  events,  we  may  safely  lay  down  in  regard  to 
Ireland,  that  every  just  petition  ought  to  be  granted, 
and  that  every  unjust  demand  ought  to  be  refused. 
The  abolition  of  the  Protestant  Established  Church,  the 


292  RECOLLECTIONS  AND   SUGGESTIONS. 

education  of  Protestant  and  Catholic  together  on  secular 
subjects,  ought  to  be  maintained.  The  parish  priests 
of  Ireland  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  ought  to  be 
supported  from  the  property  now  at  the  disposal  of 
Parliament.  A  Roman  Catholic  University  should  be 
founded.  The  power  to  gran,t  degrees  should  be  con- 
fined to  the  Queen's  University,  and  the  colleges  founded 
upon  the  advice  of  Sir  Robert  Peel  and  Sir  James 
Graham  should  be  maintained.  Those  who  insist  upon 
having  a  University  where,  by  an  Index  Expurgatorius^ 
modern  history  and  moral  philosophy  are  not  taught, 
should  be  considered  as  the  partisans  of  bigotry  and 
ignorance. 

But,  while  every  attempt  to  revive  the  University 
Bill,  rejected  in  1873  by  the  House  of  Commons,  should 
be  resisted,  the  utmost  care  should  be  taken  not  to  keep 
up  the  disdainful  and  contemptuous  tone  which  has 
been  too  long  the  prevailing  language  of  the  government 
press.  Government  can  exercise,  and  does  exercise,  a 
great  influence  over  part  of  the  press,  by  communicat- 
ing from  authority  intelligence  which  has  been  received, 
and  the  decisions  which  have  been  arrived  at  by  per- 
sons holding  high  office.  It  is  an  abuse  of  that  influence 
when  decisions,  which  have  not  been  arrived  at,  are 
suggested  by  leading  persons  as  likely  to  be  the  course 
of  policy  of  the  existing  Ministers.  I  remember  a  time 
when  the  late  Duke  of  Richmond  said  he  could  always 
tell  what  the  Cabinet  were  about  to  do  by  reading  the 
*  Times '  of  the  day  when  the  Cabinet  was  summoned. 
But  without  thus  abusing  the  right  of  a  Government, 
and  putting  a  gag  on  the  mouths  of  those  Ministers  wlio 
have  not  been  consulted  on  the  views  communicated  to 
the  '  Times '  or  *  Daily  Telegraph,'  it  would  be  easy  to 
make  it  a  condition  of  communicatiufr  intellicrence  that 


POLICY  IN  FRANCE  AND  ITALY.  293 

the  tone  of  the  newspapers  thus  favored  should  not  be 
one  of  scorn  and  insult  towards  the  people  of  Ireland. 
There  is  no  harm  in  using  towards  angry  people  the 
soft  language  which  turns  away  wrath.  Kindness  to- 
wards the  Irish  people  will  do  more  to  extinguish  bad 
passions  than  bitter  invectives  and  boastful  claims  to 
superiority  on  the  part  of  the  English  press  and  the 
English  nation. 

In  answer  to  all  I  have  urged,  it  may  be  said  that  the 
inhabitants  of  Scotland  are  Scotchmen  and  Protestants, 
and  that  the  inhabitants  of  Ireland  are  Irishmen  and 
Eoman  Catholics  ;  and  that  a  policy  which  was  success- 
ful in  Scotland  might  have  totally  failed  in  Ireland. 

It  may,  therefore,  be  useful  to  examine  what  has 
been  the  policy  pursued  by  the  Governments  of  France 
and  Italy,  and  in  what  respects  it  differs  from  the  policy 
pursued  by  the  English  in  Ireland. 

France  and  Italy,  it  is  well  known,  have  a  great 
majority  of  Roman  Catholic  inhabitants. 

I  will  not  touch  upon  Germany,  as  there  are  questions 
still  pending  in  that  country.  But  France  and  Italy 
have  for  some  time  adopted  a  policy  which  appears  to 
be  now,  and  promises  to  be  hereafter,  successful. 

This  policy  forms  a  striking  contrast  to  the  coarse 
long  pursued  by  the  English  in  Ireland. 

For  instance,  both  in  France  and  Italy  the  clergy 
have  the  means  of  living  afforded  them.  In  France, 
these  means  are  afforded  by  a  grant  of  the  Representa- 
tive Assembly.  In  Italy,  where  tithes  are  as  much 
abolished  as  they  are  in  France,  the  clergy  are  sustained 
on  moderate  salaries  by  endowments  and  voluntary  con- 
tributions from  the  principal  towns. 

But  there  are  two  subjects  sedulously  kept  apart 
from  priestly  interference.  These  are  marriage  and 
education. 


294  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

The  English  in  Ireland  have  pursued  a  totally  differ- 
ent course.  They  have  left  the  parish  priests  to  volun- 
tary contributions,  to  fees  on  baptism,  on  marriage,  and 
on  funerals.  Marriage  and  education  they  have  left 
almost  entirely  in  the  hands  of  the  Roman  clergy.  In 
the  year  1831,  an  effort  was  made  to  introduce  large 
portions  of  the  Bible  to  be  read  in  the  National  Schools. 
Archbishop  Whately  has  recorded,  by  the  pen  of  Mr. 
Senior,  what  were  his  expectations  from  his  agreement 
with  Archbishop  Murray  on  this  subject.  Dr.  Whately 
said,  '  Archbishop  Murray  and  I  agreed  in  desiring  large 
portions  of  the  Bible  to  be  read  in  our  National  Schools, 
but  we  agreed  in  this  because  we  disagreed  as  to  its 
probable  results.  He  believed  that  they  would  be 
favorable  to  Romanism ;  I  believed  that  they  would  be 
favorable  to  Protestantism  ;  and  I  feel  confident  that  I 
was  right.  ...  Though  the  priest  may  still,  perhaps, 
denounce  the  Bible  collectively  as  a  book  dangerous  to 
the  laity,  lie  cannot  safely  object  to  the  Scripture  ex- 
tracts which  are  read  to  children,  with  the  sanction  of 
the  prelates  of  his  own  church.  But  these  extracts 
contain  so  much  that  is  inconsistent  with  the  whole 
spirit  of  Romanism,  that  it  is  difficult  to  suppose  that  a 
person  well  acquainted  with  them  can.  be  a  thorough- 
going Roman  Catholic.  The  principle  upon  which  that 
Church  is  constructed,  the  duty  of  uncnquiring,  uni- 
reasoning  submission  to  its  authority,  rentiers  any  doubt 
fatal.  A  man  who  is  commanded  not  to  think  for  him- 
self, if  he  finds  he  cannot  avoid  doing  so,  is  unavoidably 
led  to  question  the  reasonableness  of  the  command ;  and 
when  he  finds  that  the  Church  which  claims  a  right  to 
think  for  him  has  preached  doctrines,  some  of  which  are 
inconsistent  with,  and  others  are  opposed  to,  what  he 
Las  read  in  the  Gospel,  his  trust  in  its  infallibility,  the 


NATIONAL  EDUCATION  IN  IRELAND. 


295 


foundation  on  which  its  whole  system  of  faith  is  built, 
is  at  an  end.  The  education  supplied  by  the  National 
Board  is  gradually  undermining  the  vast  fabric  of  the 
Irish  Roman  Catholic  Church.'  ^ 

But  Archbishop  Whately  was  not  immortal,  nor  had 
the  Irish  Board  of  Education  the  perpetuity  of  the 
Roman  Church;  consequently  it  has  become  entirely  a 
tool  in  the  hands  of  the  Roman  Catholic  clergy.  The 
case  of  Father  O'Keefe  has  shown  that  when  a  man  is 
degraded  from  the  position  of  parish  priest  he  is  sure 
to  lose  his  rank  as  manager  of  parish  schools.  The 
Education  Board  in  this  case  have  found  out  new 
offences  to  lay  upon  the  head  of  Father  O'Keefe ;  but 
this  is  one  of  the  usual  tricks  and  devices  of  the  Jesuit 
school.  The  Institution  of  Irish  Education,  once  so 
bright  a  wreath  on  the  brow  of  the  late  Lord  Derby, 
has  become  of  late  years  a  weapon  in  the  hands  of 
Cardinal  Cullen  and  the  Ultramontane  clergy  of  Ireland. 
The  number  of  pupils  on  the  rolls  were :  — 


Year. 

Number  on  the 
Rolls. 

Average  daily- 
attendance. 

1869 
1870 
1871 

991,335 

998,999 
1,021,700 

358,560 
359,199 
363.850 

That  is  to  say,  the  average  daily  attendance  but  slightly 
exceeded  one-third  of  the  number  of  children  nominally 
attending  the  schools.  The  Parliamentary  grant  to 
these  schools  last  year  amounted  to  542,222^.,  and  the 
voluntary  contributions  from  the  whole  of  Ireland  were 
only  14,955/.  That  is  to  say,  the  property  of  Ireland 
contributed  less  than  one  shilling,  while  the  State  ex- 
pended more  than  a  pound. 

1  Senior's  Journals  relating  to  Ireland,  1868. 


296  RECOLLECTIONS  AND   SUGGESTIONS. 

I  am  told  that  it  is  not  uncommon,  in  the  National 
Schools  of  Ireland,  when  the  Protestant  children  are 
"withdrawn  for  their  own  religious  instruction,  to  take, 
from  cases  in  the  wall,  the  graven  images  which  the 
Roman  Catholics  use  to  enliven  or,  as  some  would  say, 
supply  the  object  of  their  worship. 

The  question  of  marriage  need  not  here  be  dwelt 
upon.  Had  Mrs.  Fitzherbert  had  a  male  child,  the 
question  of  a  disputed  succession  might  have  been  seri- 
ous ;  but  as  that  misfortune  did  not  happen,  we  may 
for  the  present  omit  the  reflections  which  would  have 
arisen. 

The  question  of  the  state  of  the  Roman  Catholic 
Church  in  Ireland  ought  to  attract  the  serious  consider- 
ation of  our  statesmen.  Not  many  years  ago  an  Irish 
priest,  taught  at  Maynooth,  wished  to  devote  to  learning 
the  chief  employment  of  a  studious  life.  I  saw  such  a 
priest  in  France  last  year,  who,  with  his  small  library, 
and  his  bachelor  menage^  enjoyed  the  delights  of  a 
picturesque  countr}^,  and  the  regard  of  his  friendly  pa- 
rishioners. No  such  good  fortune  was  reserved  for  the 
priestly  scholar  of  Ireland.  His  sleep  was  broken  by 
the  seditious  or  indecent  songs  of  the  farmers  who  occu- 
pied a  room  close  by  his  bedroom  in  the  small  farm- 
house where  he  had  obtained  a  lodging.  Driven  to 
distraction  by  these  interruptions,  he  gave  up  his  plan 
of  study,  and  was  content  to  live  with  his  neighbors  as 
a  thoughtless  and  unlearned  priest.  Another  parish 
priest  received  a  message  requiring  his  attendance  from 
a  dying  penitent,  whose  house  was  separated  from  his 
own  dwelling  by  a  river  and  a  mountain.  He  arrived 
at  the  bedside,  but  the  penitent  was  no  more. 

Is  it  to  be  supposed  that  these  privations  and  disturb- 
ances, which  the  parish  priests  of  Ireland  suffer,  have 


ROMAN  CATHOLIC  CHURCH.  297 

had  no  effect  on  their  equanimity  and  their  tempers  ? 
Can  we  imagine  that  the  priest  who  trudged  along  the 
road  weary  and  exhausted  would  see,  with  wholly  char- 
itable feelings,  the  Protestant  rector  pass  by  in  his  chariot 
and  pair,  enjoying  the  luxury  of  his  comfortable  position 
and  his  light  labors  ?  Is  it  enough  to  say  that  the  Prot- 
estant clergy  have  their  incomes  only  for  life  ?  Have 
three  hundred  years  of  proscription  and  persecution 
passed  by  without  leaving  bitter  dregs  in  the  cup  from 
which  he  was  condemned  to  drink  ?  Why  must  we 
suppose  that  the  men  who  recollect  these  things  with 
anger,  and  perhaps  with  hatred,  are  incurably  barbarous 
and  irreclaimable  ?  Why  should  we  not  try  the  experi- 
ment which  in  France  and  Italy  has  been  found  success- 
ful? Why  not  provide  a  frugal  maintenance  for  the 
parochial  clergy  of  the  people,  and  assert  for  the  State 
the  control  of  marriage  and  education  ? 

It  is  no  question  of  the  supremacy  of  the  Pope,  or  of 
permission  to  the  Church  of  Rome  to  draw  the  line  as  it 
pleases  between  spiritual  and  temporal,  leaving  '  to  God 
that  which  is  God's,  and  to  Caesar  that  which  is  Csesar's.' 
It  is  a  question  of  the  happiness  of  a  people  long  vexed 
by  religious  injustice  and  political  oppression. 

Fortunate  the  Ministry  whose  fate  it  shall  be  — 

To  scatter  plenty  o'er  a  smiling  land 
And  read  their  history  in  a  nation's  eyes. 


298      RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 


CHAPTER  X. 


TENANTS   IN    IRELAND. 


Let  us  now  consider  the  treatment  of  tenants  in  Ire- 
land. We  have  seen  that  Mr.  Grattan  described  the 
Government  and  the  people  of  Ireland  as  a  people  ill- 
governed  and  a  Government  ill-obeyed. 

Towards  the  end  of  the  last  century  a  fit  of  liberality, 
or  a  fit  of  panic,  induced  the  Parliament  of  Ireland  to 
grant  new  franchises  to  the  Roman  Catholics.  Not  that 
a  Roman  Catholic,  the  son  of  a  gentleman  of  propert}"-, 
or  a  leading  barrister  in  the  courts  of  law,  was  permitted 
to  sit  in  Parliament  to  represent  any  portion  of  his 
countrymen,  but  the  Roman  Catholic  was  allowed  to 
choose  a  Protestant  knight  of  the  shire  or  borough 
member.  The  consequences  of  this  boon  were  most 
calamitous.  Thousands  of  freeholds  were  created,  thou- 
sands of  freeholders  were  marched  to  the  poll,  to  pur- 
chase for  a  great  proprietor  a  deanery  for  his  brother,  a 
place  at  the  Board  of  Customs  for  his  son.  In  1820,  Sir 
Robert  Peel  denounced  the  mischief  of  this  large  exten- 
sion of  the  franchise,  and  proposed  its  abolition. 

It  happened  to  me  to  be  present  at  a  small  meeting 
of  Members  of  Parliament,  mostly  Whigs,  at  the  house 
of  Sir  Francis  Burdett.  Alarmed  at  the  prospect  of 
the  destruction  of  a  popular  franchise,  we  asked  Lord 
Althorp  to  wait  upon  Sir  Robert  Peel  to  propose  for  the 
retention  of  the  forty-shilling  freeholders,'  coupled  with, 


LAW  OF  LANDLORD  AND   TENANT.  299 

the  great  measures  which  we  intended  warmly  to  sup- 
port, tord  Althorp  returned,  bringing  a  negative  to 
our  proposal.  But  I  remember  that  Sir  Francis  Burdett 
said,  '  It  seems  that  the  abolition  of  the  forty- shilling 
freeholders,  instead  of  being  a  punishment,  will  be  a 
benefit  to  Ireland.'  We  most  of  us  took  a  similar  view. 
But  we  little  knew  the  character  of  the  miserable, 
monopolizing  minority  who,  by  aid  of  the  prejudices 
of  George  III.  and  the  cry  of  '  No  Popery,'  had  so  long 
governed  Ireland.  Thousands  of  human  beings,  who 
from  their  wretched  huts  had  swarmed  to  the  elections, 
men  with  wives  and  helpless  children,  were  rooted  out 
as  noxious  weeds  when  they  had  served  their  purpose 
as  ladders,  whereby  their  landlords  miglit  climb  to 
wealth  and  to  power.  They  were  now  useless  instru- 
ments, and  hundreds  of  them  were  driven  out  in  the 
cold  days  or  bleak  nights  of  winter,  their  miserable 
cabins  levelled  with  the  ground,  iind  they  themselves, 
scantily  clothed,  left  to  struggle  with  the  inclemency 
of  the  elements,  to  die  by  the  roadside,  or  to  perish  of 
famine  after  weeks  of  suffering  and  exhaustion.  Is  it 
the  '  fickleness,  the  perversity,  and  the  levity  of  Irish- 
men '  that  has  caused  the  great  mass  of  the  people  to 
recollect  with  pain  and  with  resentment  the  heedless 
laxity  with  which  their  freeholds  were  bestowed  upon 
them,  and  the  cruelty  with  which  they  were  driven  out, 
when  their  votes  were  no  longer  available,  to  pine  and 
to  perish  ?  Or  is  it  not  rather  a  proof  that  the  people 
have  been  ill-governed?  Is  it  wonderful  that  such 
injuries,  apparent  benefits  so  fallacious,  real  sufferings 
so  undeserved,  should  have  sunk  deeply  into  their 
minds,  and  created  a  feeling  of  revenge,  against  which 
the  lounger  in  St.  James's  may  protest,  while  he  re- 
peats,  after   the    London    newspaper,,  a    declamation 


300      RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

against  *the  fickleness,  the  perversity,  the  levity  of 
Irishmen '  ? 

It  is  true  that  these  evils  have  been  in  a  great  degree 
remedied.  After  many  years  a  poor-law  was  enacted, 
and  the  wretched  families  driven  out  of  their  homes 
found  temporary  shelter  and  food,  if  they  could  get 
nothing  better.  But  at  length,  with  the  boldness  which 
belongs  to  him,  and  the  genius  which  inspires  him,  Mr. 
Gladstone  devised  a  remedy. 

In  order  to  understand  the  nature  of  this  remedy, 
the  reader  should  be  aware  that  in  England  the  land- 
lord usually  undertakes,  in  some  districts  by  established 
custom,  in  the  country  generally  by  a  prevailing  sense 
of  obligation,  to  keep  in  repair,  or  to  provide  for  the 
repair  of,  the  houses  and  farm-buildings  of  his  tenants. 
Often  the  tenant  does  not  wish  for  a  lease,  but  relies 
on  the  continuance  of  a  practice  by  virtue  of  which 
his  father  and  his  grandfather  have  flourished,  and  he 
hopes  to  continue,  neither  burdened  by  a  great  rise  of 
rent  nor  fettered  by  written  obligations. 

In  Ireland  the  tenant  was  often  left  to  provide  for  his 
own  comfort.  If  he  had  built  a  good  house,  with  a 
roof  of  slate  and  beams  of  timber,  and  was  suddenly 
turned  out  for  giving  a  vote  to  the  popular  candidate, 
he  had  no  claim  in  law  for  any  compensation.  In  Mr. 
Trench's  volume  on  the  '  Realities  of  Irish  Life,'  a 
sturdy,  rebellious  farmer  is  introduced,  who  boasts  that 
he  has  put  at  his  own  expense  every  stick  in  his  house, 
and  planted  every  cabbage  in  his  garden,  without  any 
means  of  legal  redress. 

Mr.  Gladstone  saw  that  it  was  of  no  use  to  spend  his 
time  on  legal  refinements,  or  to  show  that  in  the  course 
of  law  and  equity  the  victim  of  political  or  religious 
,enmity  could  obtain  no  redress.     He  saw  that  rough 


MR.   GLADSTONE'S  LAW.  301 

justice  was  better  than  no  justice  at  all ;  and  he  gave  a 
remedy  for  disturbance,  even  where  no  positive  injury 
had  been  inflicted. 

If  Mr.  Gladstone  has  met  with  scanty  forbearance 
from  his  opponents,  it  cannot  be  said,  as  some  Liberal 
agitators  are  fond  of  repeating,  that  the  House  of  Lords 
have  unfairly  obstructed  this  great  measure.  For  in- 
stance, the  bill  of  the  Government  proposed  that  a 
tenant  should  receive  seven  years'  rent  for  a  wilful  act 
of  ejection.  The  House  of  Lords  proposed  to  reduce 
the  seven  years  to  six ;  so  that  a  man  who  paid  51.  a 
year  rent  would  have  received  30^.  instead  of  35^.  But 
this  cannot  be  said  to  be  a  fatal  obstruction,  nor  would 
the  disturbance  have  been  compensated  very  inade- 
quately. The  seven  years  may  be  a  fairer  limit  than 
the  six;  but  it  is  a  strong  instance  of  party  injustice  to 
complain  of  the  Duke  of  Richmond,  of  Lord  Derby,  of 
Lord  Salisbury,  and  Lord  Cairns,  as  the  obstinate  and 
pertinacious  opponents  of  every  Liberal  improvement. 
This  amendment  was  afterwards  withdrawn,  and  the 
seven  years'  compensation  restored. 

Of  course  the  alterations  in  the  tenure  of  land  do 
not  cause  the  disappearance  of  an  old  hereditary  feud, 
or  prevent  altogether  those  acts  of  violence  which  are 
sanctioned  by  the  code  of  the  Ribbon  confederacy. 
In  1839  I  ventured  to  say,  in  Parhament,  that  I  trusted 
that  in  forty  years  the  grievances  of  Ireland  would  be 
redressed.  That  time  has  not  yet  come,  and  I  am  not 
sanguine  that  those  who  are  witnesses  of  the  istate  of 
Ireland  in  1879  will  see  an  end  of  Ireland's  evils,  while 
no  sufficient  remedy  is  proposed  by  authority,  and 
while  a  portion  of  the  press  makes  it  a  pastime  to 
calumniate  the  Irish  people,  and  to  provoke  enmity 
between  the  two  portions  of  the  British  Empire. 


302  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

A  work  of  great  ability  and  likewise  of  great  re- 
Bearch,  entitled  *  The  English  in  Ireland,'  ^  has  lately 
appeared.  The  work  is  in  three  thick  octavo  volumes. 
Unfortunately,  the  ability  is  misapplied,  and  the  re- 
search is  adapted  to  reconcile  the  English  people  to  the 
worst  instances  of  intolerance  and  corruption  on  the 
part  of  the  English  Governments  which  succeeded  each 
other  from  1700  to  1829. 

The  general  view  of  the  writer,  worked  out  with 
elaborate  detail,  is,  that  the  Irish  people,  in  asking  that 
Roman  Catholics  should  not  be  disqualified  and  de- 
graded on  account  of  their  religion,  that  abuses  should 
be  reformed,  and  that  honesty  should  be  introduced 
into  the  administration,  asked  that  which  it  was  pre- 
posterous to  ask,  and  which  it  was  justice  to  refuse. 
The  author  exalts  Lord  Clare  as  a  hero,  and  lowers 
Mr.  Grattan  as  the  utterer  of  '  glittering  declamations.' 
Mr.  Grattan,  as  I  have  already  mentioned^  spoke  of 
Ireland  as  *a  people  ill-governed,  and  a  Government 
ill-obeyed.'  I  must  be  excused  for  my  want  of  percep- 
tion, but  I  own  I  cannot  see  any  glitter  or  any  declama- 
tion in  this  picture.  Mr.  Grattan,  in  his  speeches  in 
the  Irish  Parliament,  described  in  minute  detail  the 
hardships  suffered  by  Irish  cottagers,  who  were  forced 
to  pay  tithes  for  their  wretched  vegetables  till  they 
were  left  in  a  state  of  impoverislmient,  ruin,  and 
despair.  It  may  be  called  glittering  declamation  to 
describe  these  sufferings  of  the  Irish  peasant,  but  I  own 
that  neither  the  adjective  nor  the  substantive  appears 
to  me  to  be  justly  applied. 

On  April  14,  1788,  Mr.  Grattan  said:  *  In  three- 
fourths  of  this  kingdom  potatoes  pay  no  tithe  ;  in  the 

1  'The  English  in  Ireland  in  the  Ei<;hteenth  Century/    James  Froude. 


TITHES  IN  IRELAND.  303 

south  they  not  only  pay,  but  pay  most  heavily.  They 
pay  frequently  in  proportion  to  the  poverty  and  help- 
lessness of  the  countrymen  ;  for  in  the  south  it  is  the 
practice  to  crouch  to  the  rich  and  to  encroach  upon 
the  poor ;  hence,  perhaps,  in  the  south  the  mutability 
of  the  common  people.  What  so  galling,  what  so 
inflammatory  as  the  comparative  view  of  the  condition 
of  His  Majesty's  subjects  in  one  part  of  the  kingdom 
and  the  other !  In  one  part  their  sustenance  is  free, 
and  in  the  other  tithed  in  the  greatest  degree ;  so  that 
a  grazier  coming  from  the  west  to  the  south  shall 
inform  the  latter  that  with  him  neither  potatoes  nor 
hay  are  tithed  ;  and  a  weaver  coming  from  the  north 
shall  inform  the  south  that  in  his  country  neither 
potatoes  nor  flax  are  tithed ;  and  thus  are  men,  in  the 
present  unequal  and  unjust  state  of  things,  taught  to 
repine,  not  only  by  their  intercourse  with  the  pastor, 
but  with  one  another. 

'  To  redress  this  requires  no  speculation,  no  extraor- 
dinary exercise  of  the  human  faculties,  no  long  fatigu- 
ing process  of  reason  and  calculation,  but  merely  to 
extend  to  the  poor  of  the  south  the  benefits  which  are 
enjoyed  by  His  Majesty's  subjects  in  the  other  parts 
of  Ireland ;  it  is  to  put  the  people  of  the  south  on  a 
level  with  their  fellow-creatures.  If  it  shall  be  said 
that  such  an  exemption  would  cause  a  great  loss  to  the 
parson,  what  a  terrible  discovery  does  that  objection 
disclose  !  that  the  clergy  of  the  south  are  principally 
supported  by  the  poor ;  by  those  whom  they  ought,  as 
moral  men,  to  relieve,  and,  as  Christian  men,  support, 
according  to  the  strictest  discipline  of  the  Church.' 
This,  I  suppose,  is  what  Mr.  Froude  calls  *  glittering 
declamation ! '  I  confess  I  do  not  perceive  the  glitter 
or  the  declamation. 


804  :ilECOLLECTIONS  AND  SlTGGESTIONS. 

It  is  true,  that  equal  rights  given  to  the  Catholics 
and  reform  of  Parliament,  obtained  previously  to  the 
Act  of  Union  with  Ireland,  might  have  raised  to  power 
such  men  as  Lord  Fitzwilliam,  Mr.  Grattan,  and  Sir 
Ralph  Abercrombie,  and  might  have  prevented  such  a 
man  as  Lord  Clare  from  taking  his  seat  in  the  English 
House  of  Lords.  Lord  Clare  was  a  man  of  splendid 
talents,  and  was  successful  in  resisting  the  Irish  Re- 
bellion ;  but  I  confess  I  cannot  see  that  in  giving  bribes 
to  a  majority  of  the  Irish  Parliament,  Mr.  Pitt  and 
Lord  Westmoreland  used  the  necessary  means  of  govern- 
ment. If  such  men  as  I  have  mentioned,  Lord  Fitz- 
william, Sir  Ralph  Abercrombie,  Lord  Cornwallis,  and 
Mr.  Grattan  had  been  employed  to  govern  the  Irish 
people  by  honest  means,  who  can  convince  me  that  such 
means  must  have  failed  ?  Who  can  prove  that  large 
salaries  and  prodigal  pensions,  unfit  appointments  to 
offices  of  trust  and  honor,  the  sale  of  peerages  for 
monej^,  and  the  support  of  the  Roman  Catholics  ex- 
torted by  promises,  not  afterwards  kept,  were  the  only 
means  by  which  Ireland  could  be  governed  ? 

I  must  reject  this  apology  for  a  system  of  intoler- 
ance and  corruption ;  I  hold  it  to  have  been  cruel  to 
Ireland  to  inflict  it,  and  shameful  to  England  to  per- 
mit it. 

Lord  Edward  Fitzgerald  and  other  victims  incurred, 
no  doubt,  the  penalties  of  high  treason ;  but,  however 
successful  the  attempt  to  blacken  and  to  blast  the 
memory  of  the  men  who  at  that  time  were  driven  by 
despair  to  appear  in  arms  against  the  Government  of 
their  country,  it  will  be  impossible  for  history,  if  fairly 
written,  to  justif}'^  the  broken  promises  of  Pitt,  and  to 
sink  in  oblivion  the  iniquity  of  his  colleagues,  CasUe- 
reagh  and  Dundas. 


NATIONAL  EDUCATION.  805 


CHAPTER  XL 

NATIONAL  EDUCATION. 

During  the  reign  of  the  House  of  Hanover  till  a  period 
within  my  memory  the  faith  of  the  Church  of  England 
was  professed  by  all  the  graduates  of  the  English 
Universities.  About  1820  an  agitation  sprang  up  for 
the  purpose  of  abolishing  religious  tests  as  a  condition 
for  admission  to  degrees.  But  this  agitation  was  con- 
demned by  the  authorities  of  the  Universities,  and  the 
Whigs  had  recourse,  in  despair  of  a  successful  change 
in  Oxford  and  Cambridge,  to  an  address  to  the  Crown 
to  allow  a  separate  University  to  be  erected,  where 
religious  tests  should  not  be  required.  This  question 
came  on  for  discussion  during  Sir  Robert  Peel's  short 
administration  of  1835,  and  the  Minister  was  defeated 
by  a  majority  of  eighty  votes.  At  a  more  recent  time, 
Mr.  Hey  wood,  brother  of  Sir  Benjamin  Heywootl, 
brought  forward  a  proposal  for  a  Commission  to  inquire " 
into  the  state  of  the  English  Universities.  As  the 
organ  of  the  Government,  I  supported  Mr.  Hey  wood, 
and,  notwithstanding  the  powerful  and  able  opposition 
of  Mr.  Gladstone,  I  succeeded  in  procuring  the  inquirj^ 
Into  the  history  of  more  recent  events  it  is  not  neces- 
sary to  enter. 

The  ancient  Universities  of  Oxford  and  Cambridge 
required  only  amendments  and  reforms  in  conformity 
with  the  spirit  of  their  institutions,  and  with  a  view  to 

20 


306  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

those  liberal  studies  which  must  from  time  to  time  be 
made  suitable  to  the  spirit  of  the  age. 

But  the  education  of  the  great  mass  of  the  people 
was  so  deficient  as  to  require  new  measures,  which 
became  the  subject  of  fierce  party  debate. 

In  1808,  the  Duke  of  Sussex,  the  Duke  of  Bedford, 
Lord  Somerville,  and  others,  established  a  society  for 
the  purpose  of  teaching  the  poorer  classes,  and  espe- 
cially with  the  view  of  giving  to  the  whole  population 
of  England  Scriptural  education.  This  society  received 
from  the  first  the  cordial  patronage  of  George  III. 

A  bystander  might  have  supposed  that  an  object  so 
simple  and  so  benevolent  as  that  of  teaching  the  people 
to  read  and  understand  the  Bible,  if  it  had  not  met 
with  warm  support,  would  have  encountered  no  oppo- 
sition. But  the  party-spirit  of  the  Church  was  roused, 
and  the  clergy  thought  that  it  was  superfluous,  if  not 
dangerous,  to  teach  the  poorer  classes  to  read.  How- 
ever, the  desire  for  instruction  among  all  classes  grew 
wider  and  deeper,  and  a  resolute  opposition  to  the 
general  education  of  the  people  became  unpopular  and 
unpalatable. 

The  friends  of  the  Church,  therefore,  in  1811,  three 
years  after  the  foundation  of  the  British  and  Foreign 
School  Society,  set  up  the  National  Society,  in  order  to 
educate  the  population  in  the  principles  of  the  Estab- 
lished Church.  Every  scholar  was  to  learn  the  Cate- 
chism, and  to  attend  divine  worship  on  Sundays  in  the 
Established  Church,  where  he  was  to  pray  for  God*s 
blessing  upon  the  bishops  and  clergy,  and  the  congre- 
gations committed  to  their  charge,  with  an  entire  omis- 
sion of  the  Dissenting  sects,  however  pious  and  liowever 
religious  they  might  be.  The  clergy  were,  however, 
permitted  to  allow  the  children  of  Dissenting  parents 


NATIONAL   SOCIETY.  307 

to  come  to  tlie  schools  of  the  National  Society,  and 
even  to  go  on  Sundays  to  worship  .with  their  parents 
if  the  clergyman  of  the  parish  did  not  forbid  so  great 
a  latitude  of  religious  liberty.  The  exertions  of  the 
National  Society,  supported  by  the  large  funds  of  the 
great  proprietors  of  England  in  addition  to  the  wealth 
of  the  Church,  were,  of  course,  successful.  But,  in 
spite  of  the  exertions  of  the  two  societies,  the  educa- 
tion of  the  general  population  of  England  was  lamen- 
tably deficient.  I,  therefore,  soon  after  Her  Majesty's 
accession  to  the  throne,  drew  her  attention  to  the  great 
want  of  education  among  her  subjects,  and  engaged 
Lord  Lansdowne,  the  President  of  the  Council,  to 
co-operate  with  me  in  the  endeavor  to  extend,  to  im- 
prove, and  to  organize  the  education  of  the  people  of 
Great  Britain.  Lord  Lansdowne,  however,  desired  to 
confine  our  official  duties  and  responsibilities  to  the 
supervision  of  the  funds  voted  by  Parliament. 

I,  therefore,  submitted  to  the  Queen  a  proposal  that 
a  Committee  of  Privy  Council,  consisting  entirely  of 
persons  holding  office  in  the  Administration,  should  be 
formed  to  superintend  the  funds  voted  by  Parliament. 
I  humbl}^  advised  that  Her  Majesty  should  express  her 
wish  that  the  youth  of  her  kingdom  should  be  relig- 
iously brought  up,  and  that  the  rights  of  conscience 
should  be  respected.  Her  Majesty  was  graciousl}^ 
pleased  to  approve  of  these  suggestions.  It  was  a  part 
of  the  plan  submitted  that  a  Normal  School  should  be 
founded,  where  the  J^oung  of  the  Established  Church, 
and  of  various  religious  sects,  should  be  educated  to- 
gether. 

Early  in  the  session  of  1839  the  heads  of  this  scheme 
were  communicated  to  the  House  of  Commons.  It  is 
difficult  to  understand  at  this  time  the  storm  that  w^as 


308  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

raised.  I  explained  in  the  simplest  terms,  without 
any  exaggeration,  the  want  of  education  in  the  coun- 
try, the  deficiencies  of  religious  instruction,  and  the 
injustice  of  subjecting  to  the  penalties  of  the  criminal 
law  persons  who  had  never  been  taught  their  duty  to 
God  and  man. 

The  proposal  of  a  Normal  School,  especially,  excited 
the  most  vehement  opposition,  and  we  were  obliged  to 
renounce  that  part  of  the  plan.  But  the  throwing  out 
of  one  of  our  children  to  the  wolf  did  little  to  appease 
hia  fury.  The  violence  of  bigotry  and  fanaticism  ex- 
cited the  numbers  brought  together  by  party  hostility. 
Lord  Stanley,  in  a  long  and  animated  speech,  proposed 
to  overthrow  our  whole  plan,  and  to  rely  upon  the 
Church  as  the  recognized  and  legitimate  teacher  of  re- 
ligious and  secular  knowledge.  On  a  division,  he  was 
defeated  by  a  majority  of  five.  The  grant  of  30,000/., 
in  a  Committee  of  Supply,  was  carried  by  a  majority 
of  only  two.  In  the  House  of  Lords,  the  Archbishop 
of  Canterbury  carried,  by  a  majority  of  one  hundred 
and  eleven,  resolutions  condemnatory  of  our  whole 
scheme. 

It  is  \exy  well  for  Mr.  Lowe  to  censure  us  for  not 
proposing  at  that  time  a  scheme  comprehending  the 
whole  population,  and  expelling  ignorance  from  the 
realm.  But  A'Ir.  Lowe  at  that  time  had  only  to  deal 
with  Australia,  we  had  to  deal  with  England. 

The  Bishop  of  London,  Dr.  Blomfield,  who  was  very 
sincerely  friendly  to  education,  suggested  to  me  that  if 
the  State  and  the  Church  went  oil  fighting,  we  shoulil 
only  injure  one  another,  without  promoting  the  great 
object  we  both  had  in  view.  Seeing  the  justice  of  this 
remark,  I  agreed  to  a  meeting  at  Lansdowne  House, 
where  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  and  the  Bishops 


COMPROMISE  WITH  THE  BISHOPS.  S09 

of  Loifdoii   and  Salisbury,  met  Lord  Lansdowne  and 
me. 

After  a  conference  we  agreed  to  a  treaty,  of  which 
the  principal  terms  were  that  the  inspectors  of  the 
schools  of  the  National  Society  should  send  their  reports 
to  the  English  bishops  as  well  as  to  the  Committee  of 
Privy  Council,  and  that  we  should  co-operate  on  the 
most  friendly  terms  in  the  great  work  of  education.  In 
this  manner  the  Committee  of  Privy  Council  of  Edu- 
cation was  confirmed,  and  has  lasted  till  the  present 
year. 

Lord  Lansdowne  attached,  with  justice,  the  greatest 
hnportance  to  the  appointment  of  inspectors,  and  to  the 
choice  of  a  chief  or  head  to  direct  and  guide  the  whole 
machine  of  education.  Lord  Lansdowne  found  a  person 
so  well  fitted  for  this  ofiice  (Dr.  Kaye,  now  Sir  James 
K.  Shuttle  worth),  that,  whether  in  his  office  at  White- 
hall or  in  his  journeys  in  the  country,  he  was  capable 
of  organizing  and  directing  the  whole  plan  according  to 
which  the  public  funds  could  be  brought  to  aid  the 
system  of  education. 

Lord  Brougham  had,  in  1833,  proposed  a  grant  to 
the  National  Society,  and  an  equal  grant  to  the  British 
and  Foreign  School  Society,  of  a  sum  of  10,000?.  each, 
for  the  purpose  of  assisting  those  two  societies.  For 
six  years  the  amount  remained  unchanged.  It  was  in 
1846  that  the  Liberal  Ministry,  having  been  restored 
to  office,  gave  fresh  vigor  to  the  cause,  and  inspired  new 
efforts  for  the  promotion  of  general  education.  Sir 
Robert  Peel,  when  he  came  into  power,  so  far  from 
continuing  the  spiteful  war  which  the  Tory  party  had 
commenced  in  1839,  expressed  to  Sir  James  Kaye  Shut- 
tle worth  his  great  satisfaction  that,  through  the  channel 
of  the  British  and  Foreign  School  Society,  the  Govern- 


310  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

ment  would  obtain  a  means  of  communicating  with  the 
Dissenting  bodies. 

It  was  about  the  year  1846,  I  think,  that  I  recom- 
mended to  the  Committee  of  Council  a  capitation 
grant  in  proportion  to  the  attendance  of  the  different 
scholars. 

It  was  long  intended  j;o  establish  a  general  system  of 
education  for  England,  and  I  frequently  spoke  of  the 
intention  both  in  the  House  of  Commons  and  at  the 
meetings  of  the  British  and  Foreign  School  Society. 

In  my  opinion  the  Act  of  1870  was  not  brought 
forward  too  late,  but  rather  too  soon.  Many  difficulties 
might  have  been  obviated,  many  objections  avoided,  and 
some  unpopular  provisions  omitted,  if  the  Government 
had  taken  more  time  for  consideration,  and  then  made 
its  plan  more  comprehensive.  In  1870  there  was  accom- 
modation for  1,878,584  children  in  schools  receiving 
grants  from  Government ;  and  in  1870-71,  there  was 
accommodation  for  2,012,679.  Now,  when  it  is  consid- 
ered that  this  school  accommodation  had  been  provided, 
not  by  the  State,  but  only  by  the  assistance  of  the  State  ; 
that  the  clergy  of  the  Church  of  England  had  shown 
unremitting  zeal  and  unflagging  attention  in  the  work 
of  education,  it  is  no  wonder  that  Mr.  Forster  has  said 
that  his  work,  and  that  of  his  colleagues,  was  to  sup- 
plement the  existing  education,  and  not  build  a  new 
house  from  the  beginning.  Indeed,  if  such  had  been 
the  attempt,  the  Government  would  have  been  guilty 
not  only  of  a  large  superfluity  of  grants  and  much 
waste,  but  of  great  ingratitude. 

That  tliere  are  some  faults  in  the  Education  Act  of 
1870  is  not  to  be  denied.  No  time  will  be  lost  if  I  sub- 
mit for  consideration  some  of  the  improvements  that 
may  be  required,  and  how  the  edifice  may  be  rendered 
complete. 


BOARD   SCHOOLS,   1870.  311 

I  am  encouraged  to  make  some  criticisms  by  the 
speech  of  Mr.  Stansfeld,  the  late  President  of  the  Board 
of  Local  Government,  at  Liverpool.  He  declares  that 
none  of  the  Cabinet,  nor  Mr.  Forster  himself,  ever  sup- 
posed that  the  Education  Act  of  18T0  was  a  perfect  or 
permanent  measure.  Such  is  the  view  that  I  have  al- 
ways taken  of  it.  I  have  considered  the  Act  of  1870  as 
an  excellent  Act,  but  as  one  that  would  be  improved, 
and  possibly  perfected,  by  the  lessons  of  experience, 
and  the  patient  observations  of  the  Committee  of 
Council. 

I  will  remark,  in  the  first  place,  that  although  the 
Government  were  quite  right  to  avail  themselves  of  the 
voluntary  efforts  that  had  been  made  between  1846  and 
1870,  a  period  of  twenty-four  years,  it  was  neither  in 
the  spirit  of  Mr.  Forster's  declaration  nor  in  the  spirit 
of  sound  progress  to  commence  a  great  scaffolding  of 
new  Voluntary  Schools  of  a  denominational  or  sectarian 
character.  There  was  this  fault  in  such  an  attempt,  that 
the  Board  Schools  intended  by  the  Act  of  1870  were  to 
be  schools  in  Avhich  the  Bible  would  be  read  in  its  in- 
tegrity, and  no  formularies  were  to  be  admitted.  The 
Voluntary  Schools  newly  to  be  set  up  were  to  receive 
instruction  according  to  catechisms  of  the  Church  of 
England,  the  very  first  questions  in  which  could  not  be 
answered  with  truth  by  the  children  of  Baptists,  who 
deny  the  propriety  of  infant  baptism,  and  in  which  a 
paraphrase  of  the  Lord's  Prayer  is  given,  which  omits 
some  of  the  most  essential  words  of  Christ,  and  inserts 
words  which  Christ  never  used,  in  the  Prayer.  This 
paraphrase  is  followed  by  an  explanation  of  the  sacra- 
ments, which  no  child  of  eight  or  ten  years  old  is  able 
to  comprehend. 

Instead  of  these  sectarian  formularies,  encouragement 


312  RECOLLECTIONS  AND   SUGGESTIONS. 

ought  to  be  given,  in  schools  aided  by  the  State,  to  the 
daily  reading  of  the  Bible,  with  such  simple  explana- 
tions as  an  intelligent  and  discreet  school-master  is  fully 
competent  to  give. 

It  is  well  known  that  in  rural  districts  the  clergy,  the 
country  gentlemen,  and  the  farmers,  intent  upon  avoid- 
ing rates,  and  hoping  to  escape  with  a  very  moderate 
subscription,  do  all  they  can  to  avoid  a  school  board,  and 
augment  the  number  of  what,  by  a  misnomer,  are  called 
Voluntary  Schools ;  but  this  is  not  the  way  to  found  a 
national  system  of  education. 

There  is,  however,  a  much  greater  defect  introduced 
into  our  system  by  the  25th  clause  or  section  of  the  Ed- 
ucation Act.  By  that  clause,  or  section  as  it  is  properly 
called,  the  only  voluntary  act  is  performed  by  the  parent 
of  the  child  to  be  taught.  Before  the  Act  of  1870  Vol- 
untary Schools  were  really  voluntary,  and  were  sup- 
ported by  voluntary  subscriptions ;  but  now  the  parent 
of  the  child  is  told,  '  If  you  have  got  any  money  in  your 
pocket,  or  if  one  of  your  neighbors  is  willing  to  subscribe 
for  a  National  or  Church  School,  the  payment  may  be 
voluntary ;  but  if  no  such  sum  can  be  procured,  the 
power  of  the  State  will  help  you  ;  and  if  your  neighbor, 
who  is  a  Baptist,  does  not  choose  to  subscribe  to  a  Church 
School,  his  chair  and  his  table  will  be  seized,  and  sold  by 
auction,  to  procure  a  sum  to  promote  the  teaching  of 
infant  baptism.*  The  Presbyterian  and  the  Congrega- 
tionalist,  in  the  same  manner,  will  undergo  compulsion 
to  compel  them  to  support  a  Voluntary  School. 

It  is  obvious  that  in  this  manner  a  great  injustice  is 
committed. 

In  the  last  century  Dissenters  were  fined  for  not  ac- 
cepting municipal  offices,  which  they  could  not  hold 
without  receiving  the  Sacrament  according  to  the  rites 


COMPULSORY   CHURCH  RATES  ABOLISHED.       313 

of  the  Church  of  England.  But  Lord  Mansfield,  in  his 
memorable  judgment  of  1767,  abolished  these  fines  as 
illegal  in  the  name  and  in  the  spirit  of  religious  liberty. 

Unhappily,  the  present  payments  by  Dissenters  to 
Church  Schools  are  legal,  being  sanctioned  by  Act  of 
Parliament.  There  is,  however,  a  precedent,  which  is 
apt  and  appropriate. 

In  the  year  1868,  on  July  31,  an  Act  was  passed, 
called  an  '  Act  for  the  Abolition  of  Compulsory  Church 
Rates.'  The  preamble  and  the  first  section  of  this  Act 
are  as  follows  :  — 

'Whereas  Church  Rates  have  for  some  years  ceased 
to  be  made  or  collected  in  many  parishes  by  reason  of 
the  opposition  thereto  ;  and  in  many  other  parishes, 
where  Church  Rates  have  been  made,  the  levying 
thereof  has  given  rise  to  litigation  and  ill-feeling : 

'  And  whereas  it  is  expedient  that  the  power  to  com- 
pel payment  of  Church  Rates  by  any  legal  process  should 
be  abolished : 

'  Be  it  therefore  enacted  by  the  Queen's  Most  Excel- 
lent Majesty,  by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the 
Lords  spiritual  and  temporal,  and  Commons,  in  this 
present  Parliament  assembled,  and  by  the  authority  of 
the  same  as  follows  :  — 

'  I.  From  and  after  the  passing  of  this  Act  no  suit 
shall  be  instituted,  or  proceeding  taken,  in  any  ecclesi- 
astical or  other  court,  or  before  any  justice  or  magistrate, 
to  enforce  or  compel  the  payment  of  any  Church  Rate 
made  in  any  parish  or  place  in  England  or  Wales.' 

This  precedent  is  the  more  applicable,  as  it  was 
originally  entertained  on  the  suggestion  of  Mr.  Glad- 
stone. 

I  will  here  give  a  rough  sketch  of  the  measures  which 
appear  to  me  suitable  for  the  completion  of  a  plan  for 
^National  Education  in  England' and  Wales:  — 


814  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

I.  England  and  Wales  should  be  divided  into  five 
or  six  hundred  districts,  each  having  its  own  name  and 
title. 

ir.  Each  district  should  have  a  board  elected  in  the 
manner  now  prescribed  by  Act  of  Parliament. 

III.  Each  district  should  have  a  central  school ;  and, 
where  necessary,  two  or  more  central  schools. 

IV.  Each  central  school  should  be  a  free  school, 
where  no  payment  should  be  required. 

V.  A  portion  of  the  Bible  should  be  read  daily  in 
each  central  school. 

VI.  The  central  school  or  schools  should  be  main- 
tained by  payments  from  the  Consolidated  Fund,  to  be 
voted  annually  by  grants  of  the  House  of  Commons. 

VII.  Denominational  or  sectarian  schools  should  be 
divided  into  two  classes ;  the  first  class  consisting  of 
schools  which  were  built  and  founded  before  the  year 
1870,  and  the  latter  of  schools  which  have  been  built 
and  founded  since  that  year.  To  the  schools  of  the 
first  class  grants  should  be  made  during  each  year  for 
ten  years ;  to  schools  of  the  second  class  for  five  years 
from  the  year  of  the  proposed  enactment.  To  schools 
of  the  first  class  half  the  yearly  cost  of  the  schools 
should  be  voted ;  to  schools  of  the  second  class  one- 
fourth  of  the  yearly  cost. 

VIII.  The  Committee  of  Privy  Council,  which  should 
direct  the  whole  plan,  should  consist  of  the  President 
and  Vice-President  of  the  Council  and  three  other  mem- 
biTs.  Ordinary  business  should  bo  conducted  by  the 
President  and  Vice-President  of  the  Council ;  extraor- 
dinary business  by  the  whole  five  members  of  tlie  Com- 
mittee. 

IX.  The  school-rates,  enacted  by  the  25th  section  of 
the  Education  Act,  should  be  treated  as  church-rates 
.are  treated  by  the*  Act  of  1868. 


PLAN  FOR  NATIONAL  EDUCATION.  315 

I  subjoin  a  few  remarks  on  the  principles  upon  which 
this  scheme  is  founded. 

The  people  of  England  and  Wales  are  not  pagans,  or 
infidels,  or  atheists.  The  School  Boards  have  already 
declared,  in  answer  to  official  inquiries,  their  preference 
for  a  religious  education.  I  have  no  doubt  that,  in 
answer  to  similar  inquiries,  they  would  declare  their 
wish  that  the  rights  of  conscience  should  be  respected. 
It  would,  therefore,  be  necessary  that  the  Roman  Cath- 
olic schools  should  be  allowed  their  own  catechism  and 
their  own  version  of  the  Bible ;  and  that  they  should 
have  the  same  grant  from  Government  as  other  denomi- 
national schools. 

It  would  be  necessary  that,  as  in  Saxony,  Switzerland, 
and  Scotland,  geography  and  history,  and  the  elementary 
parts  of  political  economy,  should  be  taught  in  the  upper 
schools  ;  or,  in  small  districts,  in  the  upper  parts  of  the 
elementary  schools.  The  revised  code  should  not  be 
permitted  or  revived. 

I  have  endeavored  to  reconcile  the  homage  and  regard 
due  to  the  Bible  with  the  consideration  which  is  due  to 
the  ministers  of  religion,  who  have  exhibited  so  much 
zeal  and  liberality  in  the  cause  of  education.  With  the 
exception  of  Roman  Catholics,  all  Christian  sects  in 
England  profess  faith  in  the  Bible.  The  working-men 
of  England  have  neither  the  time  nor  the  capacity  to 
give  religious  instruction  to  their  children. 

There  is  no  question  of  greater  interest  to  be  settled 
by  Parliament  than  the  question  of  National  Education. 
In  the  present  tranquil  state  of  our  foreign  relations, 
there  is  no  object  of  greater  importance  to  which  the 
attention  of  the  country  can  be  called  than  the  estab- 
lishment of  a  sound,  universal  system  of  education  of 
the  people. 


316  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

But,  unhappily,  there  is  no  question  upon  which  there 
seems  less  prospect  of  general  agreement.  The  clergy- 
will  not  yield  an  inch  of  their  pretension  to  tax  the 
Baptist  to  pay  for  the  teaching  of  infant  baptism,  and 
the  Presbyterian  to  call  for  God's  blessing  upon  the 
bishops  and  clergy,  and  the  congregations  committed  to 
their  charge,  with  the  marked  omission  of  the  vast  pop- 
ulation who  are  not  under  the  charge  of  the  bishops  and 
clergy  of  the  Established  Church.  Who  are  these  Prot- 
estant Dissenters  ?  Before  the  glorious  Revolution  of 
1689,  James  II.  offered  a  bribe  to  Protestant  Dissenters 
in  the  shape  of  indulgence  and  dispensations  if  they 
would  separate  their  cause  from  that  of  the  Established 
Church.     They  firmly  refused  to  do  so. 

At  another  period,  upon  the  accession  of  the  House 
of  Hanover,  there  was  an  opportunity  for  the  eminent 
men  who  at  that  time  were  at  the  head  of  Protestant 
dissent  to  appeal  to  King  George  I.  for  liberty  to  them- 
selves, accompanied  with  restrictions  on  the  Protestant 
Church.  They  resolved  that  as  the  Protestant  Church 
was  a  barrier  against  Popery,  they  were  bound  to  sup- 
port and  uphold  it. 

It  seems  to  have  occurred  to  the  High  Church  party 
that  an  opportunity  had  come  for  revenging  themselves 
upon  the  Nonconformists,  whose  benefits  are  too  heavy 
to  bear,  whose  hostiUty  they  are  happy  to  provoke,  and 
whose  downfall  they  hope  to  offer  up  as  a  sacrifice  to 
the  Bitualists,  the  affniity  of  whom  to  the  Church  of 
Home  they  dchght  to  recognize. 

The  position  of  Dissenters  is  more  fully  explained  and 
recognized  in  the  famous  speech  I  have  already  referred 
to,  of  Lord  Mansfield  in  the  case  of  the  Chamberlain  of 
London  against  Allen  Evans.  It  had  been  the  practice, 
the  intolerant  practice,  of  the  city  of  London  to  name 


LORD   MANSFIELD.  317 

Dissenters  to  certain  offices  in  their  gift,  knowing  that 
they  could  not  take  the  Sacrament  according  to  the 
rites  of  the  Church  of  England  for  a  year  before  their 
election,  and  reckoning  upon  the  fine  which  they  would 
be  able  to  levy  to  increase  the  funds  of  the  corporation. 

When  the  case  came  to  be  heard,  seven  judges  gave 
their  opinion  that  the  defendant  was  at  liberty  to  object 
to  the  validity  of  his  elecjion,  and  only  one  judge,  Mr. 
Baron  Perratt,  gave  his  opinion  that  the  defendant  was 
not  at  liberty  to  object  to  the  validity  of  his  election. 

Lord  Mansfield  stated  that  as  the  Corporation  Act 
was  originally  framed,  the  disability  '  was  owing  to  what 
was  then  in  the  eye  of  the  law  a  crime ;  every  man 
being  required  by  the  canon  law,  received  and  confirmed 
by  statute  law,  to  take  the  Sacrament  in  the  church  at 
least  once  a  year ;  the  law  would  not  permit  a  man  to 
say  that  he  had  not  taken  the  Sacrament  in  the  Church 
of  England,  and  he  could  not  be  allowed  to  plead  it  in 
bar  of  any  action  brought  against  him.' 

But  Lord  Mansfield  went  on  to  state  in  noble  terms, 
'  that  Nonconformity  being  no  longer  a  crime,  the 
natural  liberty  of  the  subject  was  in  favor  of  the  Dis- 
senter. There  is  no  usage  or  custom,  independent  of 
positive  law,  which  makes  Nonconformity  a  crime. 
The  eternal  principles  of  natural  religion  are  part  of 
the  common  law;  the  essential  principles  of  revealed 
religion  are  part  of  the  common  law,  so  that  any  person 
reviling,  subverting,  or  ridiculing  them  may  be  prose- 
cuted at  common  law.  But  it  cannot  be  shown  from 
the  principles  of  natural  or  revealed  religion  that,  inde- 
pendent of  positive  law,  temporal  punishments  ought  to 
be  inflicted  for  mere  opinions  with  respect  to  particular 
modes  of  worship.  Persecution  for  a  sincere,  though 
erroneous,  conscience  is  not  to  be  deduced  from  reason 


318  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

or  the  fitness  of  things ;  it  can  only  stand  upon  positive 
law.  .  .  .  The  Toleration  Act  renders  that  which  was 
illegal  before,  now  legal ;  the  Dissenters'  way  of  wor- 
ship is  permitted  and  allowed  by  this  Act ;  it  is  not  only 
exempted  from  punishment,  but  rendered  innocent  and 
lawful ;  it  is  established,  it  is  put  under  the  protection, 
and  is  not  merely  under  the  connivance,  of  the  law.  In 
case  those  who  are  appointed  by  law  to  register  Dis- 
senting places  of  worship  refuse  on  any  pretence  to  do 
it,  we  must,,  upon  application,  send  a  mandamus  to 
compel  them.'  ^ 

Lord  Mansfield  was  able  to  say  that  the  requiring  the 
payment  of  a  fine  by  the  Dissenters  was  both  unjust  and 
illegal.  But  the  Dissenters  who  now  say,  '  We  will  not 
pay  denominational  fees,  because  it  does  violence  to  our 
religious  scruples,'  may  say,  indeed,  that  it  is  unjust  to 
compel  them  to  do  so ;  but  they  cannot  say  that  it  is 
illegal.  It  is  for  this  reason  that  Lord  Cairns  cannot 
follow  in  the  steps  of  Lord  Mansfield,  while  he  may 
entertain  sentiments  as  liberal  as  those  of  the  great 
Tory  judge. 

It  may  be  said  that  the  precedent  of  Lord  Mansfield's 
judgment  does  not  apply,  as  in  that  case  Dissenters 
were  singled  out  for  penalty  and  fined  as  Dissenters. 
But  there  is  a  more  recent  precedent  which  is  clearly 
applicable.  Church-rates,  when  voted  by  a  majority  of 
rate-payers,  were  payable  by  all  householders.  The 
present  school-rates  are  payable  by  the  Baptist  house- 
holder on  the  demand  of  a  Churchman  parent  who 
wishes  his  son  to  acknowledge,  in  the  words  of  the 
Catechism,  the  efficacy  of  infant  baptism,  and  the  teach- 
ing given  to  the  infant  by  his  godfather  and  godmother. 

1  •  Parliamentary  History/  1767. 


DENOMINATIONAL  SCHOOLS.  819 

The  difference  between  the  two  parties  is  clearly  pointed 
out  by  a  writer  in  the  '  Pall  Mall  Gazette '  of  Jan.  28, 
1874 ;  that  writer  says :  '  "  We  will  not  pay  denomi- 
national fees  because  it  does  violence  to  our  religious 
scruples,"  and  "you  must  pay  denominational  fees, 
because  to  refuse  them  does  violence  to  other  peoples' 
religious  scruples ; "  these  represent  the  positions  re- 
spectively occupied  by  the  two  parties.' 

There  is,  indeed,  in  one  of  the  States  of  New  England, 
if  not  more  than  one,  a  way  out  of  the  difficulty.  In 
the  State  of  Massachusetts  there  is  no  compulsion  on 
the  parent  to  send  his  boy  or  girl  to  school.  It  is  left 
to  him  to  find  out  the  advantage  of  having  his  children 
educated  in  reading,  writing,  and  arithmetic.  The 
schools  are  all  free  schools.  At  the  end  of  the  year 
the  expenses  of  all  the  schools  are  charged  as  an  article 
in  the  Budget  upon  the  revenue  of  the  State,  and  the 
amount  is  generally  the  heaviest  item  in  the  State 
Budget. 

I  am  told,  however,  that  such  a  scheme  would  not  be 
palatable  in  England,  and  that  parents  would  not  take 
advantage  of  the  opportunity  of  sending  their  sons  and 
daughters  to  school. 

It  seems  to  me,  therefore,  that  what  was  done  as 
regards  church-rates  ought  to  be  done  in  regard  to 
school-rates.  Any  deficiency  in  the  payment  of  rates 
could  be  made  good,  if  public  opinion  approved  of  it, 
by  an  additional  grant  in  the  House  of  Commons. 
Tlie  amount  required  would  not  be  large,  and  the  poor 
parents,  who  wanted  to  send  their  sons  to  Church 
schools,  would  probably  be  better  off  than  they  are 
now. 

Let  me  here  say,  that  I  do  not  look  upon  Denomina- 
tional Schools  with  any  of  the  horror  with  which  they 


320  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

are  regarded  at  Birmingham.  For  many  years  I  pro- 
posed large  grants  in  the  House  of  Commons  for  schools 
mainly  supported  by  the  clergy  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land. There  is  much  to  be  learned  in  the  Catechism 
which  will  do  no  one  any  harm.  With  liberal  grants 
from  Parliament,  the  elementary  facts  of  history  and 
geography  might  be  easily  and  well  taught.  If  the 
children  under  fourteen  years  of  age  were  taught  on 
three  days  of  the  week,  and  allowed  to  apply  the  other 
three  to  industry,  recompensed  by  wages,  the  cause  of 
education  and  the  cause  of  labor  and  industry  would 
be  both  promoted. 

June  15, 1874.-^1  perceive  that  in  a  recent  debate  in 
the  House  of  Commons,  Lord  Frederick  Cavendish  and 
Mr.  Salt  each  proposed  a  scheme  by  which  the  religious 
difficulty  in  the  schools  would  be  solved.  One  scheme 
is,  that  a  large  additional  grant  should  be  made  for  edu- 
cation by  Parliament.  The  other  scheme  is,  that  Vol- 
untary Schools  should  be  required  out  of  their  existing 
funds  to  educate  the  sons  and  daughters  of  pauper 
Churchmen.  Either  of  these  schemes  seems  to  me  to 
furnish  an  easy  solution  of  a  difficulty  which  has  cre- 
ated much  ill-will,  and  may  produce  further  discord. 
Unless  the  High  Church  party  desires  as  a  Christian 
object,  and  the  Prime  minister  desires  as  a  political 
object,  to  put  down  Dissenters,  one  of  these  schemes 
will  be  accepted,  and  the  cause  of  peace  and  good-will 
towards  men  will  make  new  progress. 

To  return  once  more  to  the  question  of  the  Dissentere : 
I  see  it  is  repeated  over  and  over  again,  that  it  would 
be  very  hard  to  compel  a  man  to  send  his  boy  to  school, 
and  then  not  to  allow  him  to  choose  the  school  to  which 
his  boy  shall  be  sent.  Very  hard,  indeed,  I  answer,  if 
the  parent  can  afford  to  pay  for  the  school  he  chooses, 


REMEDIES  PROPOSED.  821 

and  bis  boy's  maiutenance  tbere,  or  if  he  can  get  a 
subscripfcion  from  a  friend  for  that  payment.  But  that 
the  man  should  have  a  right  to  put  his  hand  into  his 
neighbor's  pocket,  and  take  out  of  it  such  a  sum  as 
will  enable  him  to  send  his  boy  to  a  school  Avhich 
teaches  opinion  to  which  that  neighbor  has  a  conscien- 
tious objection,  is  unjust.  It  would  be  better  to  abolish 
compulsion  in  the  matter  of  education  altogether  than 
to  inflict  such  injustice.  The  fact  is,  that  the  Church 
of  Rome  and  the  Protestant  Dissenters  of  England 
have  practices  totally  distinct  on  the  subject  of  religion. 
The  Church  of  Rome  indulges  in  absolutions  and  dis- 
pensations ;  she  declares  it  is  wrong  for  a  man  to  marry 
his  niece,  or  his  first  cousin,  and  then  she"  grants  a 
special  dispensation  for  the  purpose.  At  the  beginning 
of  Lent  a  proclamation  is  made  that  on  certain  days 
the  strictest  fast  is  to  be  observed.  Not  only  meat  and 
fowls,  but  butter,  milk,  and  cream  are  prohibited.  But 
then  both  men  and  women  of  weak  constitution  can 
easily  obtain  a  license  dispensing  with  these  severe 
rules. 

The  Protestant  Dissenters  of  England  have  a  totally 
different  view.  I  can  give  an  instance  of  the  scruples 
they  entertain.  I  asked  Mr.  John  Wood,  the  Chairman 
of  the  Board  of  Inland  Revenue,  whether  his  father 
had  acted  as  a  magistrate  during  the  time  the  Corpora- 
tion and  Test  Acts  had  been  in  force.  His  answer  was, 
'  No,'  his  father  had  no  objection  to  take  the  Sacrament 
according  to  the  rites  of  the  Church  of  England,  but 
he  did  not  like  to  do  it  for  a  purpose  which  by  the  law 
was  prohibited. 

The  late  Mr.  Henry  Drummond  said,  in  the  House 
of  Commons,  that  two  centuries  ago  every  man  was 
governed  by  the  word  credo^  but  that  in  the  present 

21 


822  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

century  the  governing  word  was  changed  to  credit.  It 
is  thus  that  at  the  present  time  the  giievance  which 
affects  the  consciences  of  Dissenters  is  dechired  by  the 
most  powerful  organ  of  the  press  to  be  a  '  blot  which 
is  very  minute.'  In  fact,  some  of  the  organs  of  public 
opinion  care  little  for  a  cause  which  does  not  affect  the 
price  of  the  Three  per  Cents,  and  makes  only  a  very 
minute  difference  in  the  price  of  Erie  shares. 


TREATY  OF  WASHINGTON.  323 


CHAPTER    XII. 


TREATY  OF  WASHINGTON. 


It  is  a  painful  part  of  my  task  to  discuss  the  foreign 
policy  of  the  late  British  Ministry,  and  especially  the 
Treaty  of  Washington,  with  its  antecedents  and  accom- 
paniments.    But  this  task  cannot  be  avoided. 

I  shall,  in  the  first  place,  refer  to  the  opinions  re- 
corded by  Baron  de  Hiibner.  Baron  de  Hiibner  is  an 
intelligent  traveller,  who  has  been  more  than  once  in 
the  United  States.  But,  besides  this,  he  has  had  great 
diplomatic  experience,  having  been  for  some*  time  the 
Ambassador  of  Austria  in  France,  and  is  universally 
esteemed  for  his  good  sense  and  sagacity.  He  thus 
puts  on  record  the  opinions  he  gathered  from  English- 
men and  citizens  of  the  United  States  on  his  last  voyage 
to  America :  '  The  English  regret  unanimously  that 
there  was  any  necessity  to  make  concessions,  but  in 
their  opinion  the  satisfaction  outweighs  the  discontent. 
If  I  am  not  much  mistaken,  that  is  the  feeling  which 
predominates  in  England.  American  statesmen  ap- 
pear uncertain  as  to  the  value  they  ought  to  attach 
to  the  Treaty.  .  .  .  In  the  opinion  of  the  public  at 
large,  the  Treaty  of  Washington  is,  on  the  part  of  the 
English  Government,  an  act  of  deference  — the  acknowl- 
edgment of  the  superiority  of  the  power  of  the  United 
States.  England  has  submitted  —  she  has  capitulated  ; 
neither  more  nor  less.     If  this  erroneous  interpretation 


324  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

is  spread  throughout  the  Union,  and  takes  root  in  the 
conviction  of  the  masses,  the  conciliatory  dispositions 
which  have  animated  the  English  negotiators  are  ill- 
understood,  and  this  Treaty,  while  removing  present 
difficulties,  will  have  prepared  the  minds  of  men  for 
future  complications.'  ^ 

This  last  remark  of  Baron  Hiibner  is  of  great  im- 
portance. If  it  is  believed,  in  the  opinion  of  the  public 
at  large  in  America,  that  the  Treaty  of  Washington  is, 
on  the  part  of  the  people  of  England,  '  an  acknowledg- 
ment of  the  superiority  of  the  power  of  the  United 
States :  England  has  submitted  and  has  capitulated  ; ' 
such  a  conviction  in  the  mind  of  a  nation  so  proud 
and  self-sufficient  as  the  Republic  of  the  United  States 
is  no  doubt  a  bad  preparation  for  peace.  It  is  a  great 
mistake  to  suppose  that  a  concession,  even  the  most 
abject  to  a  foreign  nation,  is  certain  to  conciliate  their 
good-will.  The  power  which  conceives  that  a  great 
Empire  has  confessed  its  inferiority,  is  apt  to  make 
demands  which  a  nation  having  a  lively  sense  of  honor 
is  certain  to  reject.  For  instance,  the  present  Govern- 
ment of  the  United  States  might  ask  from  the  present 
Government  of  England  the  annexation  of  Canada 
with  the  States  of  the  Union.  Some  members  of  the 
late  Cabinet  might  think  this  a  cheap  mode  of  securing 
peace.  But  Lord  Palmerston  always  considered  the 
retention  of  Canada  essential  to  the  maintenance  of 
British  honor,  and  the  nation  at  large  would  assuredly 
agree  with  Lord  Palmerston  in  this  opinion.  Thus  the 
danger  of  war  would  not  be  averted,  but  increased  by 
the  proposal  of  this  concession. 

It  remains  to  be  considered,  however,  whether  there 

*  *  Promenade  Autour  du  Monde/  vol.  ii. 


TREATY  OF   WASHINGTON.  325 

are  any  just  grounds  for  the  opinion,  that  the  conces- 
sions made  in  and  by  the  Treaty  of  Washington,  or  in 
consequence  of  that  Treaty,  were  '  an  act  of  deference 
and  an  acknowledgment  of  the  superiority  of  the  power 
of  the  United  States.'  If  not,  the  opinion  is  a  mere 
bravado  on  the  part  of  the  American  people,  but  the 
following  points  may  be  quoted  in  support  of  the 
American  opinion  :  — 

I.  That  instead  of  subjecting  the  conduct  of  the 
British  Government,  during  the  civil  war  in  the  United 
States,  to  the  known  rules  of  International  Law  and 
the  provisions  of  the  Foreign  Enlistment  Act,  an  ex 
post  facto  law  was  invented,  by  which,  and  by  the  ar- 
bitrary interpretation  of  which,  the  conduct  of  the 
British  Government  was  tried  many  years  after  the 
event. 

II.  That  that  part  of  the  Treaty  of  1846  which  re- 
spects the  channel  between  the  American  continent  and 
Vancouver's  Island  was  subjected  to  a  perversion  of  its 
plain  words,  whereby  British  interests  were  exposed  to 
the  risk  of  a  wrong  decision  by  the  arbiter  pointed  out 
by  the  Treaty  of  Washington. 

III.  That  while  the  British  Government  professed 
to  give  redress  for  any  wrongs  inflicted  on  either  side 
during  the  civil  war,  the  injuries  inflicted  on  the 
Canadian  subjects  of  the  Queen,  killed  or  wounded, 
by  the  Fenian  invasion  from  the  United  States  were 
not  provided  for,  either  by  the  demands  of  the  British 
Government  or  by  the  provisions  of  the  Treaty  of 
Washington. 

On  June  12,  1871,  Lord  Granville,  alluding  to  an 
assertion  of  mine,  said  — 

*  The  noble  Earl  said  that  the  United  States  has 
made  no  concessions ;  but,  in  the  very  beginning  of  the 


326  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

protocols,  Mr.  Fish,  renewing  the  proposition  he  had 
made  before  to  much  larger  national  claims,  said :  — 

* "  The  history  of  the  '  Alabama,'  and  other  cruisers 
which  had  been  fitted  out  or  armed,  or  equipped,  or 
which  had  received  augmentation  of  force  in  Great 
Britain  or  in  her  Colonies,  and  of  the  operations  of 
those  vessels,  showed  extensive  direct  losses  in  the 
capture  and  destruction  of  a  large  number  of  vessels 
with  their  cargoes,  and  in  the  heavy  national  expen- 
ditures in  the  pursuit  of  the  cruisers  ;  and  indirect 
injury  in  the  transfer  of  a  large  part  of  the  American 
commercial  marine  to  the  British  flag,  in  the  enhanced 
payments  of  insurance,  in  the  prolongation  of  the  war, 
and  in  the  addition  of  a  large  sum  to  the  cost  of  the 
war  and  the  suppression  of  the  rebellion ;  and  also 
showed  that  Great  Britain,  by  reason  of  failure  in  the 
proper  observance  of  her  duties  as  a  neutral,  had  become 
justly  liable  for  the  acts  of  those  cruisers  and  of  their 
tenders  ;  that  the  claims  for  the  loss  and  destruction  of 
private  property  which  had  thus  far  been  presented 
amounted  to  about  fourteen  millions  of  dollars,  without 
interest;  which  amount  was  liable  to  be  greatly  in- 
creased by  claims  which  had  not  been  presented." 

*  These  were  pretensions  which  might  have  been 
carried  out  under  the  former  arbitration ;  but  they  en- 
tirely disappear  under  the  limited  reference  which 
includes  merely  complaints  arising  out  of  the  escape 
of  the  ''  Alabama."  ' 

Who  would  have  supposed  that,  after  this  solemn 
declaration  of  the  Secretary  of  State  for  Foreign  Affairs, 
made  in  the  House  of  Lords,  these  *  Indirect  Claims ' 
for  the  prolongation  of  the  war,  and  various  other  pre- 
posterous claims  which  had  never  been  heard  of  before, 
would  ever  be  heard  of  again  ?    Every  one  would  have 


BRITISH  HONOR.  327 

supposed  that  all  these  claims  would  have  been  with- 
drawn from  the  decision  of  the  arbitrators,  and  that  the 
British  Government,  if  the  American  Government  had 
not  consented  to  their  withdrawal,  would  have  refused 
to  appear  in  the  Hall  of  Arbitration.  But  so  far  was 
this  from  being  the  case,  that  the  British  arbitrator,  it 
is  true,  did  not  appear  to  arbitrate  on  the  Indirect 
Claims ;  but  a  decision  was  come  to  by  the  arbitrators, 
and  the  claims,  which  Lord  Granville  declared  had 
entirely  disappeared,  were  dismissed,  not  as  being  con- 
sistent with  the  Treaty,  or  expunged  from  the  Amer- 
ican case,  but  as  inconsistent  with  the  law  of  nations. 

That  a  Government  should  sign  a  Treaty,  and  should 
afterwards  allow  to  go  before  arbitrators  articles  which 
that  Government  had  declared  not  to  be  contained  in 
the  Treaty,  appears  to  me  entirely  inconsistent  with 
the  national  honor. 

So,  likewise,  the  omission  to  insist  upon  compensation 
for  the  wives  who  had  lost  their  husbands,  and  the 
mothers  who  had  lost  their  sons,  by  the  Fenian  invasion 
of  Canada,  was  a  desertion  of  that  protection  to  life  and 
property  of  the  Queen's  subjects  upon  which  Her 
Majesty's  Ministers  were  bound  to  obtain  redress.  Tt 
is  to  be  remarked  that,  although  many  American  mer- 
chants lost  property  by  the  aggressions  of  the  '  Ala- 
bama,' the  only  injuries  to  life  and  limb  were  inflicted 
on  British  subjects.  Sir  John  Macdonald,  the  late 
Prime  Minister  of  Canada,  expressed,  in  a  public 
speech,  his  surprise  and  dissatisfaction  at  this  neglect. 

2.  The  surrender  of  the  Island  of  Juan,  and  the  re- 
treat from  the  line  which  General  Scott,  an  honorable 
American  officer,  had  fixed  of  his  own  accord,  was  a 
serious  and  wanton  loss ;  and,  on  the  whole,  it  is  no 
wonder   that   the    American   public   should   have  con- 


328  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

eluded  that  '  the  Treaty  of  Washington  is,  on  the  part 
of  the  English  Government,  an  act  of  deference  —  the 
acknowledgment  of  the  superiority  of  the  power  of  the 
United  States.  England  has  submitted  —  she  has  capit- 
ulated ;  neither  more  nor  less.' 

One  is  tempted  to  ask.  Why  should  England  have 
performed  this  act  of  deference  ?  Have  English  troops 
surrendered  at  Saratoga  ?  Has  an  English  army  ca- 
pitulated at  Yorktown?  Have  hostile  fleets  paraded 
the  British  Channel  in  defiance  of  England  ? 

So  far  was  it  from  true  that  such  or  similar  events 
have  happened,  that  one  of  the  last  transactions  that 
took  place  between  the  two  countries  before  Mr.  Glad- 
stone acceded  to  office  was,  that  Great  Britain,  having 
demanded  the  liberation  of  American  citizens  captured 
in  the  'Trent,'  and  having  intimated  that  a  refusal 
of  her  demands  might  produce  serious  consequences, 
those  demands  were  complied  with,  promptly  and  un- 
conditionally. 

3.  The  position  taken  by  Her  Majesty's  representa- 
tives with  regard  to  the  Treaty  of  1846,  signed  by 
Mr.  Pakenham,  was  singularly,  if  not  intentionally, 
calculated  to  produce  a  decision  adverse  to  the  claims 
of  the  British  Commissioners.  The  Treaty  of  1846 
said,  in  plain  terms,  that  persons  named  by  the  two 
Powers  were  to  draw  a  line  across  the  strait  which 
separates  the  American  shore  from  Vancouver's  Island, 
that  upon  arriving  at  the  point  which  intersects  that 
line,  at  the  40th  parallel  of  latitude,  a  line  was  to  be 
drawn  through  the  middle  of  the  channel  to  the  south 
till  the  line  should  reach  the  open  sea. 

It  might  have  been  difficult  to  find  a  passage  free 
from  obstacles  in  the  middle  of  the  channel,  but  the 
obvious  resource  was  to  take  a  line  that  would  approxi- 


TREATY  OF   WASHINGTON.  329 

mate  most  nearly  to  the  middle  of  the  channel,  and 
allow  of  an  open  passage.  But  unfortunately  it  oc- 
curred to  the  British  Commissioners  that  the  line 
through  the  middle  of  the  channel  was  to  be  found 
in  a  channel  close  to  the  American  shore,  departing 
altogether  from  the  words  of  the  Treaty.  It  occurred, 
on  the  other  hand,  to  the  American  Commissioners, 
that  the  proper  line  through  the  middle  of  the  strait 
was  to  be  found  close  to  the  shore  of  Vancouver's 
Island.  It  was  quite  evident  that  neither  a  line  which 
went  close  to  the  American  shore,  nor  a  line  which 
went  close  to  Vancouver's  Island,  could  be  the  line 
intended  by  the  Treaty. 

It  is  perfectly  obvious  that  a  line  that  was  to  go  to 
the  midst  of  the  channel  which  separates  the  Conti- 
nent from  Vancouver's  Island,  and  then  southerly  to 
the  middle  of  the  channel  of  Fuca's  Straits,  and  then 
to  the  Pacific,  could  not  approach  the  American  shore ; 
nor,  on  the  other  hand,  could  a  line  which,  leaving  the 
middle  of  the  channel,  approached  Vancouver's  Island, 
be  the  channel  intended  by  the  Treaty  of  1846.  So 
that  neither  the  channel  called  Rosario,  nor  the  channel 
called  the  Canal  de  Haro,  was  the  channel  intended  by 
the  Treaty.  Moreover,  the  British  Government  was 
perfectly  aware  that  the  Canal  de  Haro  would  be  un- 
favorable to  the  British  Government.  This  is  stated 
in  the  case  of  the  Government  of  Her  Britannic  Maj- 
esty :  — 

'  An  interpretation,  therefore,  of  the  Treaty  which 
would  declare  the  Canal  de  Haro  to  be  the  channel 
down  which  the  boundary  line  is  to  be  carried,  would 
be  to  declare  that  Her  Britannic  Majesty's  Government, 
when  it  concluded  the  Treaty  of  1846,  intended  to  favor 
the   United  States  Crovernment  to  its  own  prejudice,  for 


330  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

it  would  be  to  declare  that  Her  Britannic  Majesty's 
Government  intended  to  abandon  the  use  of  the  only 
channel  leading  to  its  own  possessions  which  it  knew 
to  be  navigable  and  safe,  and  to  confine  itself  to  the 
use  of  a  channel  respecting  which  it  had  no  assurance 
that  it  was  even  navigable  in  its  upper  waters  for  sea- 
going vessels  ;  nay,  respecting  which  it  is  not  too  much 
to  say,  that  Her  Britannic  Majesty's  Government  had  a 
firm  belief  that  it  was  a  dangerous  strait, "^  ^  Her  Majesty's 
Ministers  being  thus  fully  persuaded  that  the  choice  of 
the  Canal  de  Haro  would  favor  the  United  States  Gov- 
ernment to  the  prejudice  of  Great  Britain,  deliberately 
resolved  to  leave  the  Emperor  of  Germany  no  alterna- 
tive, but  to  bind  him  to  choose  between  a  boundary 
through  the  Rosario  Straits  or  through  the  Canal  de 
Haro.  Had  the  British  Government  submitted  the 
whole  Treaty  of  1846  to  the  arbitration  of  the  Emperor 
of  Germany,  there  might  have  been  a  decision  favor- 
able to  the  interest  of  Great  Britain ;  but,  pinned  to 
the  choice  between  two  lines,  both  inconsistent  with 
the  Treaty,  the  learned  men  to  whom  the  Emperor  of 
Germany  referred  the  question  decided  it  against  Great 
Britain.  They  probably  thought  that  Great  Britain 
could  well  bear  an  additional  humiliation.  Therefore 
it  was,  that  not  only  were  the  wives  of  Canada  left 
widows,  not  only,  were  the  mothers  of  Canada  left  child- 
less, without  compensation,  but  it  was  determined  to 
complete  the  surrender  of  British  honor  and  of  British 
character. 

If  we  look  back  to  the  transactions  of  former  times, 
it  appears  that  in  1793-94  there  was  a  complaint  made, 
on  the   part  of  Great  Britain,  that  British  merchant 

^  Case  of  the  British  Government. 


TREATY  OF  WASHINGTON.  331 

ships  had  been  captured  within  the  jurisdiction  of  the 
United  States.  A  correspondence  between  the  Govern- 
ments of  London  and  Washington  accordingly  took 
place.  It  so  happened  that  at  that  time  each  Govern- 
ment was  presided  over  by  a  man  of  high  honor  and 
integrity.  At  the  head  of  the  Foreign  Office  of  Eng- 
land was  Lord  Grenville,  descended  from  an  ancient 
and  honorable  English  family.  At  the  head  of  the 
Government  of  America  was  George  Washington,  de- 
scended from  a  family  of  the  Cavaliers  of  the  time  of 
Charles  I.  These  two  men  were  determined  to  pursue 
the  paths  of  truth  and  justice.  Mr.  George  Hammond, 
the  father  of  the  respected  Under-Secretary  of  State 
for  Foreign  Affairs,  wrote,  in  May,  1793,  that  several 
ships  belonging  to  British  merchants  had  been  captured 
by  the  French  frigate  the  'Embuscade,'  and  had  been 
condemned  as  lawful  prize  by  the  French  Consul.  On 
May  15,  Mr.  Jefferson  wrote  in  the  following  terms  to 
Mr.  Hammond  :  '  Sir,  —  Your  several  memorials  of  the 
8th  instant  have  been  laid  before  the  President,  as  had 
been  that  of  the  2d,  as  soon  as  received.  They  have 
been  considered  with  all  the  attention  and  impartiality 
which  a  firm  determination  could  inspire,  to  do  what 
is  equal  and  right  between  all  the  belligerent  Powers.' 

Mr.  Jefferson  goes  on  to  state  that  the  condemnation 
as  legal  prize  of  a  British  vessel  captured  by  a  French 
frigate  was,  as  Mr.  Hammond  had  justly  stated,  '  not 
warranted  by  the  usage  of  nations,  nor  by  the  stipula- 
tions existing  between  the  United  States  and  France.' 

In  a  subsequent  part  of  his  letter,  Mr.  Jefferson 
states,  '  The  capture  of  the  British  ship  "  Grange,"  by 
the  French  frigate  "  I'Embuscade,"  has,  on  inquiry, 
been  found  to  have  taken  place  within  the  Bay  of  Dela- 
ware, and  jurisdiction  of  the  United  States,  as  stated  in 
your  memorial  of  the  2d  instant ;  the  Government  is. 


332      RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

therefore,  taking  measures  for  the  liberation  of  the  crew 
and  restitution  of  the  ship  and  cargo.' 

The  correspondence  between  the  two  Governments 
was  carried  on  in  the  same  friendly  spirit  in  which  it 
had  been  commenced.  There  was  no  question  of  arbi- 
tration ;  a  convention  was  signed,  by  which  commission- 
ers were  appointed  to  estimate  the  value  of  the  British 
vessels  captured,  and  their  cargoes,  which  had  been 
brought  as  prizes  into  the  ports  of  the  United  States, 
and  it  is  stated  to  be  much  underrated  at  the  amount 
of  195,548Z.  sterling,  and  the  compensation  was  paid  in 
due  course. 

The  relations  of  amity  between  the  two  countries  of 
England  and  the  United  States  were  not  disturbed,  and 
not  even  the  oldest  of  the  old  women  of  Great  Britain 
expressed  any  apprehension  of  war  between  the  two 
nations.  But  then  General  Washington  had  no  inclina- 
tion to  calumniate  Lord  Grenville,  and  the  Secretarj^  of 
the  Treasury  in  England  was  not  concerned  in  raising 
a  panic  in  England  for  the  sake  of  obtaining  a  majority 
in  the  House  of  Commons. 

Had  Lord  Granville  agreed  to  see  me  before  he  sent 
his  mission  to  Washington,  I  should  have  pointed  out  to 
him  the  weak  parts  of  our  case ;  I  should  have  said,  as 
Lord  Chief  Justice  Cockburn  has  since  done,  that  after 
I  had  received  the  opinion  of  Sir  Robert  Collier,  there 
was  Q.  primd  facie  case  for  detaining  the  *  Alabama,'  and 
that  I  had  failed  in  not  doing  so  during  the  interval  of 
four  days  which  elapsed  before  I  received  the  legal 
opinion  of  the  Law  Officers  of  the  Crown.  General 
Washington,  in  like  manner,  had,  from  mistake,  allowed 
British  ships  to  be  captured  within  the  jurisdiction  of 
the  United  States. 

Had  Lord  Granville  and  Mr.  Gladstone  conducted 
themselves  as  General  Washington  and  Mr.  Jefferson 


TREATY  OF  WASHINGTON.  333 

had  done  in  1793,  compensation  would  have  been  paid, 
at  a  moderate  and  not  a  fancy  value,  for  the  ships  capt- 
ured and  destroyed  by  the  'Alabama.'  There  would 
have  been  no  war,  no  panic,  and  no  arbitration. 

I  only  trust  that  if  any  similar  case  should  arise  of 
mistakes  in  regard  to  the  law  of  nations,  or  the  exact 
sense  of  treaties,  the  official  correspondence  will  be  con- 
ducted in  the  tone  of  George  Washington  and  Mr. 
Jefferson,  of  Lord  Grenville  and  Mr.  Hammond,  and 
not  in  the  language  of  Fish  and  Gushing,  of  Lord  Gran- 
ville and  the  Marquis  of  Ripon.  In  any  such  case,  I 
shall  say  to  Lord  Granville,  as  Sir  Peter  Teazle  said  to 
Mrs.  Candour,  '  If  my  character  is  attacked,  I  only  beg 
of  you  not  to  undertake  my  defence.' 

There  can  be  no  better  testimony  to  the  honesty  with 
which  the  neutrality  of  England  was  observed  than  that 
of  Mr.  Grote. 

I  must  confess  that  the  conduct  of  Lord  Granville 
and  Mr.  Gladstone  on  this  occasion  deeply  wounded  my 
feelings.  I  was  not  quite  satisfied  with  the  behavior  of 
Lord  Clarendon,  when  he  left,  without  notice,  the  orig- 
inal dispatch  of  Mr.  Fish.  But  our  characters  were  safe 
in  the  hands  of  the  British  Parliament  and  the  British 
people.  It  was  a  different  question  when  the  accusa- 
tion of  falsehood  and  hypocrisy  was  laid  in  the  name  of 
the  Government  of  the  great  Republic  before  five  arbi- 
trators of  different  nations. 

The  Prime  Minister  and  the  Foreign  Secretary  took 
for  their  model,  apparently,  the  character  of  Donna 
Inez  in  the  poem  of '  Don  Juan  ' :  — 

Calmly  they  heard  each  calumny  that  rose, 

And  saw  his  agonies  with  such  sublimity, 

That  all  the  world  exclaimed  *  What  magnanimity !  * 

So  let  it  be. 


334  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

The  more  I  respect  the  constitution  and  the  character 
of  the  great  American  Republic,  the  more  am  I  inclined 
to  feel  calumnies  from  such  a  source.  Happily,  neither 
the  memory  of  Lord  Palmerston  nor  my  character  are 
likely  to  suffer  from  the  charges  of  Mr.  Fish.  It  is  to 
be  hoped  that,  on  any  similar  occurrence,  the  British 
nation  will  have  better  defenders  than  those  who  held 
the  offices  of  First  Lord  of  the  Treasury  and  Secretary 
of  State  for  Foreign  Affairs  in  the  years  1871  and  1872. 

Had  Lord  Granville  remembered  his  promise  to  see 
me  before  the  President  of  the  Council  departed  for 
Washington,  I  should  have  advised  him  not  to  insist  on 
the  weak  parts  of  our  case. 

I  assent  entirely  to  the  opinions  of  the  Lord  Chief 
Justice  of  England,  that  the  '  Alabama '  ought  to  have 
been  detained  during  the  four  days  in  which  I  was 
waiting  for  the  opinion  of  the  law  officers.  But  I  think 
that  the  fault  was  not  that  of  the  Commissioners  of 
Customs;  it  was  my  fault,  as  Secretary  of  State  for 
Foreign  Affairs. 

I  should  have  been  glad  to  have  admitted  that  fault 
as  plainly  and  as  explicitly  as  General  Washington  ad- 
mitted his  mistake  in  1793. 

I  have  only  further  to  say,  that  I  do  not  wish  to 
impute  to  Mr.  Gladstone  and  Lord  Granville  any  per- 
sonal ill-will  to  me  in  all  this  matter.  But  they  seem 
to  have  been  quite  unaware  that  the  United  Kingdom 
is  a  great  country,  and  that  its  reputation  ought  to  be 
dear  to  every  British  heart. 


POLICY  FOR  THE  FUTURE.  335 


CHAPTER  XIII. 

POLICY    FOR    THE    FUTURE. 

When  I  first  came  into  public  life,  the  great  Empire  of 
Napoleon  was  tottering  to  its  downfall.  Yet  his  insane 
confidence  in  his  star  was  scarcely  abated.  Having 
been  successful  in  a  trifling  action  in  the  interior  of 
France,  he  said  to  three  of  his  marshals  who  were  with 
him  at  supper,  '  In  six  weeks  we  shall  be  on  the  Vistula.' 
The  abdication  of  Fontainebleau  put  an  end  to  these 
dreams.  He  himself  had  said,  with  his  wonderful 
sagacity,  '  If  the  Emperor  of  Austria  were  driven  five 
times  out  of  Vienna  he  would  come  back  with  un- 
diminished strength;  but  if  I  am  once  driven  out  of 
Paris,  I  may  never  sit  on  the  throne  again.' 

In  expectation  of  the  fall  of  Napoleon,  there  were 
two  great  problems  to  be  solved :  Who  should  be  the 
Sovereign  of  France  ?  What  should  be  the  boundaries 
of  France? 

The  restoration  of  the  Bourbons  was  agreed  to  with- 
out much  difficulty. 

The  future  extent  and  limits  of  France  seem  to  have 
been  decided  by  the  advice  of  England. 

The  Emperor  Alexander  told  Count  Pozzo  de  Borgo 
that  Lord  Aberdeen  had  spoken  to  him  of  the  Alps,  the 
Pyrenees,  and  the  Rhine  as  the  future  limits  of  France. 
Pozzo  de  Borgo  replied  that  neither  the  Prince  Regent 
nor  his  Ministers  would  consent  to  such  frontiers. 


336  RECOLLECTIONS  AND   SUGGESTIONS. 

Not  long  after  this  Lord  Castlereagh  wrote  to  Lord 
Aberdeen  to  instruct  him  that  the  English  Ministers 
would  grant  the  limits  of  the  French  Monarchy  in  1792 
as  the  boundaries  of  the  kingdom  of  Louis  XVIIL 

Upon  this  question  hung  the  decision  then  made,  and 
perhaps  the  future  history  of  France.  Napoleon  wrote 
to  his  brother  Joseph,  the  mock-King  of  Spain,  that  if 
it  fell  to  his  fortune  to  sign  peace  with  the  allies,  and 
they  granted  him  the  natural  frontiers  of  France,  mean- 
ing the  Alps,  the  Pyrenees,  and  the  Rhine,  he  would  do 
all  in  his  power  to  observe  that  peace  ;  but  if  they  gave 
liim  a  restricted  frontier,  he  should  seize  the  first  oppor- 
tunity of  making  a  quarrel,  and  endeavor  to  recover  the 
whole  of  the  left  bank  of  the  Rhine. 

Such  was  the  quarrel  upon  which,  after  fifty-six 
years  of  peace.  Napoleon  III.,  the  nephew  of  the  great 
Napoleon,  fastened,  in  July,  1870,  as  a  fit  cause  for 
renewed  war  in  Europe.  Napoleon  III.  —  inferior  to  the 
first  Napoleon  in  preparing  for  war,  in  collecting  his 
armies  for  war,  and  in  making  war  —  fell  in  1870  as  his 
uncle  had  done  in  1814.  But  the  contest  is  not  yet 
over.  The  French  nation  is  hungry  for  the  recovery  of 
Alsace  and  the  surrendered  parts  of  Lorraine. 

As  soon  as  Napoleon  III.  took  the  command  of  his 
army  at  Metz,  he  informed  them,  in  an  order  of  the  day, 
that  they  would  have  many  sieges  to  undertake.  Those 
sieges  were,  doubtless,  the  sieges  of  Cologne,  of  Cob- 
lentz,  of  Mentz,  of  Landau.  His  hopes  were  disap- 
pointed, his  projects  defeated.  But  the  quarrel  remains 
for  the  present  or  for  a  future  generation.  The  objects 
to  be  sought  are,  a  restored  French  Empire  on  the  one 
side,  a  powerful  and  united  Germany  on  the  other. 

It  is  easy  to  see  on  which  side  are  the  interests  of 
England  and  of  Europe. 


FRONTIERS   OF  FRANCE. 


337 


Perhaps  it  will  be  enough  for  the  United  Kingdom  in 
1874,  as  it  would  have  been  enough  in  1792,  to  refuse 
the  most  tempting  offers  of  France,  and  to  keep  aloof 
from  the  quarrel. 

We  may  rely  upon  the  prudence  of  Germany,  of 
Austria,  and  of  Russia,  that  ttese  three  Powers  will 
remain  banded  together  in  spirit,  if  not  in  form.  Some 
eight  or  ten  months  before  the  war  of  1870  broke  out. 
Lord  Clarendon  informed  me  of  his  own  knowledge  that 
Prussia  had  an  understanding  with  Russia,  according  to 
which  Russia  would  have  an  army  of  sufficient  strength, 
on  the  frontier  of  Polish  Galicia,  to  prevent  Austria 
from  assisting  France  in  the  coming  war.  That  Russia 
was  prepared  so  to  act,  that  Austria  was  fullj^  aware  of 
it,  and  that,  forewarned,  she  meant  to  be  forearmed, 
are  facts  which  have  lately  been  given  in  an  authentic 
bhape  to  the  English  public. 

We  may,  I  trust,  be  confident  that  when  the  crisis 
comes,  our  Minister  of  Foreign  Affairs  will  neither  be 
taken  by  surprise  nor  omit  the  measures  which  the 
emergency  will  require. 

There  are  some  who  suppose  that  the  Sovereigns  of 
Europe  will  look  only  to  their  own  advantage,  and  will 
be  only  anxious  to  divide  Belgium,  Holland,  and  Lux- 
emburg among  them  as  a  magnificent  banquet. 

But,  in  the  first  place,  the  Sovereigns  of  Europe  are 
not  in  these  days  such  plunderers  and  murderers  as  the 
newspapers  imagine  them  to  be.  In  the  next  place,  it 
would  be  difficult  to  satisfy  the  various  pretensions  of 
the  Sovereigns,  and  give  to  each  the  slice  that  would 
appease  his  appetite. 

It  is,  indeed,  not  difficult,  but  impossible,  to  say  what 
may  be  the  circumstances  in  which  a  new  war  in  Europe 
may  arise.     If  Germany  should  attempt  to  annex  Hol- 

22 


338  RECOLLECTIONS  AND   SUGGESTIONS. 

land,  I  trust  that  the  arm  of  England  will  be  lifted  in 
defence  of  Holland.  If  France,  or  any  other  Power, 
should  conspire  to  destroy  the  independence  of  Belgium, 
I  trust  that  Lord  Palmerston's  Treaty  of  1839  will 
bring  England  to  the  aid  of  Belgium.  If  the  dreams  of 
Na2)oleon  I.  should  inspire  some  future  Bonaparte,  and 
induce  him  to  attempt  to  recover  what  are  called  the 
natural  frontiers  of  France,  I  trust  that  the  revival  of 
another  hundred  days  will  lead  to  a  third  overthrow  of 
France.  But  at  present  all  is  dark ;  and  we  can  only 
trust  that  when  the  day  of  danger  arrives,  England  will 
prove  true  to  her  engagements,  conscious  of  her  great 
power,  and  mindful  of  her  duties  to  mankind. 


/ 


GENERAL  ELECTION.  389 


CHAPTER  Xiy. 

GENERAL  ELECTION. — FALL   OF  MR.   GLADSTONE'S 
MINISTRY. 

The  crisis  has  arrived.  The  General  Election  has  given 
a  majority  of  upwards  of  fifty  to  the  Tory  Opposition  ; 
and  it  is  reported  that  Mr.  Gladstoiie's  Cabinet  have 
determined  to  resign. 

With  respect  to  the  result  of  the  General  Election, 
there  are  numbers  of  precedents  for  such  an  event.  In 
1690,  only  one  year  after  the  glorious  Revolution,  com- 
plaints were  made  that  the  Whigs  had  gone  too  far  in  a 
spirit  of  exclusiveness,  all  the  members  of  corporations 
who  had  accepted  King  James's  rule  being  excluded  for 
seven  years  from  office.  This  was  done  by  w^hat  was 
called  the  Sacheverell  Clause.  King  William  prorogued 
Parliament  with  a  view  to  an  immediate  dissolution. 
When  the  General  Election  came,  the  turn  of  the  tide 
against  the  Whigs  was  conspicuous.  The  four  members 
for  the  city  of  London  were  replaced  b}^  four  Tories. 
Sir  Isaac  Newton,  who  had  been  elected  for  the  Univer- 
sity of  Cambridge,  resigned  his  seat,  and  gave  his  vote 
in  favor  of  Sir  Robert  Sawyer,  a  very  prominent  Tory. 
The  elections  went,  generally,  in  the  same  channel ; 
and,  although  it  was  not  then  the  custom  to  change  the 
entire  Ministry  as  the  effect  of  a  General  Election,  many 
Whigs  retired  from  the  Executive,  and  many  Tories 
succeeded  to  their  places. 


340  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

In  the  reign  of  Queen  Anne,  the  name  of  Sacheverell 
again  occurs,  as  that  of  a  man  impeached  by  foolish  zeal 
and  Whig  proscription.  In  1710,  when  Dr.  Sacheverell 
was  rashly  impeached,  and  Queen  Anne  had  given  to 
Tory  Ministers  the  predominance  which,  in  the  days  of 
Marlborough  and  Godolphin,  had  been  enjoyed  by  the 
Whigs,  four  Tories  of  the  High  Church  party  came  in 
for  the  city  of  London  at  the  General  Election. 

But  the  most  signal  example  of  a  change  of  popular 
feeling,  and  the  downfall  of  Whig  power,  occurred  in 
1784  —  Fox  and  Burke  were  dismissed  from  office.  The 
most  prominent  men  of  that  day  thought  the  attempt  to 
make  a  new  Ministry  of  the  Opposition  so  foolish  as  to 
be  ridiculous  ;  ^  yet  Pitt,  by  the  exercise  of  extraordinary 
patience,  and  by  keeping  his  footsteps  in  the  narrow 
path  of  the  Constitution,  gained  a  great  triumph.  The 
coalition  of  Fox  and  North  had  disgusted  the  people ; 
the  India  Bill,  with  its  oligarchy  of  seven  party  men  to 
be  rulers  of  India,  alarmed  the  King  for  the  safety  of 
his  prerogative. 

Where  Fox  and  Burke  were  defeated,  it  can  be  no 
disgrace  to  Gladstone  to  have  failed. 

The  General  Election  of  1841,  which  drove  the 
Whigs  from  office,  and  gave  a  majority  of  ninety-one 
to  Sir  Robert  Peel,  is  fresh  in  the  recollection  of  all 
our  elder  statesmen. 

We  come  now  to  the  fall  of  Mr.  Gladstone. 

There  can  be  no  doubt  that  Mr.  Gladstone,  by  his 
great  eloquence,  by  his  power  of  developing  the  most 
abstruse  propositions,  and  embracing  at  once,  in  his  large 
capacity,  the  most  logical  demonstrations  with  the  most 
captivating  and  dazzling  rhetoric,  has  made  for  himself 

^  See  '  Letters  of  Sir  Gilbert  Elliot/  lately  published. 


FALL  OF  MR.   GLADSTONE.  341 

a  fame  wliicli,  in  the  lapse  of  centuries,  will  suffer  no 
eclipse.  The  only  man  whom  I  have  heard  in  Parlia- 
ment who  combined  to  an  equal  degree  the  most  severe 
reasoning  with  the  most  wonderful  flights  of  imagination 
was  Mr.  Plunket  in  his  speeches  for  Catholic  emancipa- 
tion. But  Mr.  Gladstone  will  be  renowned  not  only 
for  his  parliamentary  eloquence,  but  for  his  legislative 
acts. 

For  three  hundred  years  the  Protestant  Established 
Church  of  Ireland  has  been  the  most  odious  and  offen- 
sive emblem  of  the  corruption  and  the  intolerance  of 
England.  To  have  quietly  removed  this  monopoly  so 
offensive  to  the  Irish  nation,  the  target  against  which 
the  arrows  of  Ireland's  best  archers  were  always  aimed, 
without  any  of  the  rabbling  which  marked  the  expulsion 
of  the  English  liturgy  from  Scotland,  without  disorder, 
without  riot,  is  a  great  feat  in  the  history  of  any  states- 
man. No  man  can  complain  that  he  has  been  wronged, 
a  nation  may  rejoice  that  she  has  been  righted.  The 
attempts  to  remedy  this  portentous  injury,  without 
extinguishing  the .  Church  to  turn  the  curse  into  a 
blessing,  were  sure  to  prove,  as  Lord  Althorp,  Lord 
Durham,  and  I  contended  in  Lord  Grey's  Cabinet  they 
would  be  in  1833,  stupendous  failures.  Driving  with 
the  Duke  of  Leinster  one  day,  some  miles  from  Carton, 
we  came  to  a  very  handsome  new  church,  fit  for  the 
reception  of  several  hundred  people.  That,  said  the 
Duke  of  Leinster  to  me,  is  one  of  the  churches  erected 
by  the  Commissioners,  under  Lord  Stanley's  Church 
Reform  Act.  The  only  Protestants  of  the  parish  are 
the  Duchess  and  I,  and  we  always  attend  at  the  church 
at  Maynooth. 

Not  a  less  conquest  over  difficulties,  perhaps  a  greater, 
was  Mr.  Gladstone's  Land  Act.     A  farmer,  who  had 


842  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

built  a  house,  roofed  it  with  slate,  put  glass  in  the 
windows  and  vegetables  in  the  garden,  might  have 
been  turned  out  for  giving  a  wrong  vote  at  an  election 
without  any  legal  claim  for  compensation  of  the  smallest 
amount.  It  was  said  that  these  instances  were  rare, 
but  the  power  to  commit  such  injustice  was  an  evil  to 
be  remedied.  Mr.  Gladstone,  doing  rough  justice  to 
the  poor  tenantry  of  Ireland,  added  to  the  right  of  the 
evicted  tenant  to  obtain  shelter  and  food  at  the  work- 
house, the  right  to  pecuniary  compensation  for  dis- 
turbance, to  the  amount  of  seven  years'  rent  of  his 
holding. 

These  reforms  require  the  sanction  of  time  to  make 
them  fit  and  easy,  and  that  advantage  be  taken  of  the 
wise  provision  of  Lord  Cairns,  that  the  Irish  Church 
Act  should  be  subject  to  revision.  The  landlords  of 
Ireland,  upon  whom,  by  the  Act  of  1836,  the  obligation 
of  paying  tithe  rent-charge  was  imposed,  have  no  right 
whatever  to  claim  the  .extinction  of  that  rent-charge 
in  their  own  favor.  It  was  a  bribe  to  the  landlords  of 
Ireland  which  may  still  be  withdrawn.  I  am  one  of 
those  who  have  had  the  advantage  of  the  Act  of  1869, 
but  I  am  quite  willing  to  give  up  that  advantage  and  to 
leave  my  heirs  still  subject,  as  I  am  now,  to  the  pay- 
ment of  the  tithe  rent-charge. 

I  do  not  wish  in  this  place  to  recite  by  rote  the  faults 
of  Mr.  Gladstone  as  a  statesman,  but  I  feel  bound  to 
do  him  justice  with  respect  to  another  great  act  of  his 
career. 

The  Education  Act  of  1870  was  a  great  and  wise 
measure,  framed  with  a  view  to  complete  the  assistance 
which  had  already  been  given  b}-  Parliament  to  popular 
instruction.  Mr.  Forster  was  wise  as  well  as  just  in 
proposing  rather  to   complete   by  supplementary  pro- 


MR.   GLADSTONE.  343 

visions  what  liad  been  done,  than  to  kick  down  the 
scaffolding  which  had  been  already  erected,  and  build 
from  the  ground  a  new  edifice.  But  in  the  manner  of 
doing  this,  Mr.  Forster  adopted  a  very  clumsy  expe- 
dient, and  made  his  measure  offensive  and  insulting  to 
the  Protestant  Dissenters  of  England.  It  would  have 
been  easy  to  supply  the  need  of  sectarian  or  denomina- 
tional schools  by  grants  from  the  House  of  Commons. 
The  Tory  party  would  equally  have  assisted  Mr.  For- 
ster, and  a  great  cause  of  irritation  would  have  been 
spared.  To  tell  a  Baptist  he  must  support  a  voluntary 
school,  and  that  if  he  does  not  choose  to  do  so,  his  table 
and  chair  will  be  sold  by  auction,  was  a  revival  of 
church-rates  in  a  more  offensive  form.  It  is  said  that 
the  Dissenters  would  object  as  much  to  a  vote  of  Par- 
liament in  favor  of  denominational  schools  as  to  a  school- 
rate.  But  it  is  one  thing  to  agitate  against  the  payment 
of  a  rate  which  offends  his  conscience,  and  another 
thing  to  agitate  at  a  public  meeting  for  the  repeal  of  an 
Act  of  Parliament  or  a  change  of  its  provisions.  The 
Society  of  Friends  never  petition  against  the  votes  for 
the  army  and  navy. 

I  may  as  well  proceed  now  to  name  two  other  prom- 
inent causes  of  Mr.  Gladstone's  defeat  at  the  General 
Election, 

At  the  same  time  with  Mr.  Gladstone's  manifesto 
appeared  declarations  generally  in  favor  of  progress, 
but  urging  the  abolition  of  the  Church  Establishment, 
and  the  proposal  of  free  land,  free  church,  free  schools. 

These  proposals  put  me  in  mind  of  a  note  of  Dean 
Swift,  on  a  remark  of  Bishop  Burnet,  that  the  Duke 
of  Monmouth  was  a  man  free  of  all  vice.  '  Yes,'  said 
Dean  Swift,  '  as  a  man  is  free  of  a  club.' 

Mr.  Chamberlain,  who  is  a  leading  apostle  of  this 


344  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

school,  reminds  me,  with  his  notions  of  progress,  of  Tony 
Lumpkin,  in  the  play  of  '  She  Stoops  to  Conquer.'  I 
will  copy  part  of  a  dialogue  from  that  play,  in  which 
Tony  Lumpkin  and  his  mother  represent  tolerably  well 
Mr.  Chamberlain  and  John  Bull.  When  asked  to  de- 
scribe his  journey,  Tony  answers  :  — 

'  Tony.  You  shall  hear.  I  first  took  them  down  Feath- 
erbed Lane,  where  we  stuck  fast  in  the  mud.  I  then 
rattled  them  crack  over  the  stones  of  Up-and-down  Hill. 
I  then  introduced  them  to  the  gibbet  on  Heavy-tree 
Heath  ;  and  from  that,  with  a  circumbendibus,  I  fairly 
lodged  them  in  the  horse-pond  at  the  bottom  of  the 
garden. 

' Hast.  But  no  accident,  I  hope? 

'  Tony.  No,  no,  only  mother  is  confoundedly  fright- 
ened.'^ 

So  in  this  case,  no  harm,  no  accident  has  happened,  but 
John  Bull  was  '  confoundedly  frightened.'  In  fact,  he 
has  been  more  frightened  than  hurt  b}'  the  threats  of  the 
advanced  Liberals.  Mr.  Chamberlain  was  left  at  Shef- 
field at  the  bottom  of  the  poll.  Mr.  Roebuck  and  Mr. 
Mundella  have  been  triumphantly  returned.  But  the 
want  of  plain  speaking  on  the  part  of  Mr.  Gladstone 
has  ruined  his  cause.  One  opponent,  indeed,  attacked 
Mr.  Gladstone,  of  whom  Mr.  Gladstone,  with  more  truth 
than  A jax,  may  say,  — 

Et  cum  rictus  erit,  mecum  certasse  feretur. 

A  third  fault  of  his  Ministry,  however,  was  greater 
than  either  of  the  others. 

By  his  foreign  policy  ho  has  tarnished  the  national 
honor,  injured  the  national  interests,  and  lowered  the 

1  *  She  Stoops  to  Conquer/  act  r. 


MR.   GLADSTONE.  345 

national  character.  Happily  the  strength  of  the  Em- 
pire, as  it  is  described  in  the  Imperial  Census,  abridged 
in  the  '  Times '  of  February  19,  1874,  is  such,  that  no 
power  will  be  in  a  hurry  to  quarrel  with  us. 

And  surely  peace  and  happiness,  truth  and  justice, 
religion  and  piety,  are  such  blessings  that  we  ought  not 
to  put  a  limit  to  the  time  we  may  hope  to  possess  them. 
That  future  generations  should  have  the  same  blessings, 
that  there  may  be  no  rashness,  no  impatience,  no  greed- 
iness to  catch  the  fruit  before  the  sun  of  summer  has 
matured  it,  is  my  earnest  prayer  for  the  country  whose 
freedom  I  have  worshipped,  and  whose  liberties  and 
prosperity  I  am  not  ashamed  to  say  we  owe  to  the 
providence  of  Almighty  God. 


846  RECOLLECTIONS  AND   SUGGESTIONS. 


CONCLUDING    CHAPTER. 

I  PROPOSE  in  the  present  chapter  to  end  this  long  and 
"various  narrative.  I  wish,  in  doing  so,  to  review  the 
present  state  of  England  and  pending  questions  both 
as  regards  the  external  and  the  internal  relations  of  the 
United  Kingdom.  But  before  I  do  so,  it  may  be  well 
to  give  in  a  summary  my  own  view  of  the  coui*se  I  have 
pursued,  and  of  the  results  I  have  obtained. 

When  I  first  began  public  life,  the  Tories  of  England, 
who  were  styled  by  Madame  de  Stacl,  with  truth  and 
justice,  the  Whigs  of  Europe,  had  achieved  a  decided 
and  a  successful  victory.  I  could  only  say  with  Lord 
Byron, 

I  greatly  venerate  the  nation's  glories, 

And  wish  they  were  not  owing  to  the  Tories. 

At  this  time  Lord  Liverpool  and  Lord  Castlereagh  ruled 
the  destinies  of  England.  After  the  suicide  of  Lord 
Castlereagh  and  Mr.  Canning's  death,  Mr.  Peel  became 
the  real  chief  of  the  Tory  party  and  of  the  majority 
which  followed  his  lead.  The  chief  heads  of  the  policy 
which  he  adopted  may  be  thus  stated:  — 

(1)  The  Roman  Catholics  were  to  be  pcrmauontly 
excluded  from  Parliament  and  from  office. 

(2)  The  Protestant  Church  of  Leland  was  to  be 
maintained  without  diminution  or  alteration. 

(3)  Foreign  corn  was  not  to  be  admitted,  except  at  a 
very  high  duty,  into  the  United  Kingdom  till  the  corn 
of  England  had  reached  nearly  a  famine  price. 


PLAN  OF  REFORM.  847 

(4)  Other  articles  of  foreign  produce  and  manufact- 
ure were  to  be  admitted  with  high  duties,  on  the  prin- 
ciple of  protection. 

It  would  be  an  injustice  to  Sir  Robert  Peel  if  these 
governing  principles  of  policy  were  to  be  stated  as  the 
results  of  his  own  intelligent  mind.  But  he  was  gov- 
erned by  the  narrow  views  and  intolerant  principles 
of  the  Tory  party,  which  had  embraced  measures  ex- 
pedient, and  perhaps  necessary,  during  war,  but  which 
were  quite  unfitted  for  a  policy  of  peace. 

The  point  to  which  I  directed  my  efforts  was  the 
refusal  to  grant  even  the  most  moderate  measure  of 
parliamentary  reform.  I  proposed  as  a  minimum  to 
give  members  to  Manchester,  Leeds,  and  Birmingham. 
This  proposal  was  considered  in  the  Cabinet  in  the 
time  of  Sir  Robert  Peel.  But  it  was  rejected,  and 
from  that  time  it  became  hopeless  to  extract  even  the 
smallest  concession  upon  this  subject  of  parliamentary 
reform  through  the  Tory  Administration. 

The  Duke  of  Wellington  pronounced  the  existing 
system  perfect,  and  in  a  few  days  was  obliged  to  give 
up  his  post  to  Lord  Grey. 

At  Lord  Grey's  desire  I  prepared  a  plan  of  reform, 
by  which  one  hundred  and  fifty  seats  for  close  boroughs 
were  to  be  transferred  to  the  great  manufacturing 
towns  and  populous  counties  of  England.  Although 
nothing  had  been  heard  of  such  proposals  before,  they 
were  no  sooner  promulgated  than  popular  enthusiasm 
rose  in  its  strength  and  converted  them  into  law.  It 
happened  soon  after  this  event  that  I  was  called  upon 
to  lead  the  House  of  Commons,  and  then  obtained  in 
Lord  Melbourne  not  so  much  a  master  as  a  friend  and 
a  co-operator. 

I  had  carefully  studied  the  history  of  the  civil  wars 


348  RECOLLECTIONS  AND   SUGGESTIONS. 

of  England  and  of  the  Revolution  of  France.  The  best 
men  of  England  and  the  best  men  of  France  had  been 
carried  forward  by  a  current  in  which  they  knew  not 
how  to  guide  the  ship  intrusted  to  their  care.  I  had 
my  own  difficulties.  The  Philosophical  Radicals  were 
intent  upon  the  destruction  of  the  Church  ;  the  Chartists 

,  wished  to  create  confusion.  With  such  dangers  I  had 
to  contend,  and  might  have  been  overwhelmed  in  the 
flood.  With  the  help  of  Sir  Robert  Peel  and  a  majority 
of  the  House  of  Commons  I  defeated  the  Philosophical 
Radicals.     With  the  valuable  aid  and  assistance  of  the 

V  Duke  of  Wellington  I  reduced  the  Chartists  to  insig- 
nificance. 

I  do  not  wish  to  carry  this  narrative  further.  It 
seems  to  me  that  in  1873  the  contest  had  been  fully 
decided :  that  we  had  carried  into  effect  a  change 
which  has  given  prosperity  for  more  than  forty  years, 
without  convulsion,  without  infringing  the  prerogatives 
of  the  Crown,  the  privileges  of  the  two  Houses  of  Par- 
liament, or  the  rights  and  liberties  of  the  people,  which 
Lord  Grey,  in  the  name  of  his  Sovereign,  had  called 
upon  the  nation  to  maintain  and  defend. 

I  should  mention,  however,  that  soon  after  the  Re- 
form Bill  was  carried,  20,000,000?.  were  granted  as 
compensation  to  the  owners  of  slaves.  Mr.  Stephen, 
one  of  the  ablest  men  whom  I  have  known  in  the 
course  of  political  life,  and  Mr.  Taylor,  whose  high 
worth  as  a  poet  all  England  knows,  and  whom  it  is  a 
happiness  to  me  to  call  my  friend,  had  calculated  at 
20,000,000^  the  loss  which  the  planters  would  incur  by 
the  abolition  of  slavery.  But  it  was  one  thing  to  esti- 
mate the  loss  ;  it  was  another  to  obtain  from  Parliament 
means  to  defray  the  20,000,000?.  charged  upon  the 
national  revenue.     This  could  only  be  done  by  Lord 


RITUALISM.  349 

Althorp,  the  guardian  of  the  public  finances,  and  the 
responsible  Minister  for  the  national  exchequer. 

Lord  Althorp  did  not  shrink  from  this  appalling  task. 
The  British  nation  had  been  aroused  to  enthusiasm  by 
agitation,  and  the  continual  distribution  of  pamphlets 
and  addresses.  Mr.  Stephen  said  with  great  justice, 
'  That  we  ought  to  be  thankful  to  God  for  having  per- 
mitted us,  even  at  such  a  cost,  to  atone  for  the  sin  of 
so  many  years  of  slavery.' 

I  have  already  given  my  views  respecting  the  state 
of  Ireland,  and  with  respect  to  the  past  and  future 
of  education. 

I  have  reserved  for  the  last  part  of  this  account 
the  sensual  or  symbolical  worship  of  the  Church  of 
Rome  and  its  imitators,  the  melodramatic  representa- 
tion of  the  Crucifixion. 

We  all  know  that  when  Christ  was  brought  to  trial 
for  his  life  before  Pontius  Pilate  he  prayed  to  God  that 
he  might  be  spared  this  painful  sacrifice,  but  concluded 
his  prayer  by  saying  to  God,  '  Not  my  will,  but  thy  will 
be  done.'  We  all  know  that  the  Jewish  mob  called 
out,  '  Crucify  him !  Crucify  him ! '  and  that  he  under- 
went an  ignominious  and  degrading  death.  But  we 
have  now  to  relate  that  men  who  are  not  required  to 
endure  an  hour's  pain  for  the  benefit  of  mankind,  put 
on  all  kinds  of  harlequin  dresses,  and  perform  all  sorts 
of  antics,  to  resemble,  as  they  pretend,  the  great  and 
memorable  sacrifice  of  Christ's  propitiation ;  and,  with- 
out suffering  pain  in  a  little  finger,  pretend  to  imitate 
and  assume  the  attitudes  of  our  Saviour,  and  to  ac- 
complish in  their  own  persons  the  mystery  of  a  divine 
being  who  actually  gave  his  life  for  the  benefit  of  man- 
kind. If  this  were  only  like  one  of  the  sacred  plays 
of  the  Spanish  theatre,  we  might  be  content  to  say  that 


350  RECOLLECTIONS  AND   SUGGESTIONS. 

it  was  a  contemptible  farce,  but  assuming,  as  it  does,  to 
be  an  act  to  inspire  devotion,  and  give  to  the  Christian 
world  a  lively  representation  by  clerical  performers  of 
the  real  tragedy  which  was  performed  in  Jerusalem 
under  the  Roman  government  more  than  eighteen  hun- 
dred years  ago,  we  can  only  pronounce  it  to  be  a  shock- 
ing profanation. 

It  will  be  enough  to  show  that  I  am  not  exagger- 
ating the  assumptions  or  the  pretences  used  to  disguise 
this  offensive  spectacle  by  alluding  to,  and  quoting  a 
writer  in  the  '  Directorium  Anglicanum^^  an  authorized 
publication  of  the  Ritualist  section  of  our  religious 
comminiity.  The  whole  service,  indeed,  instead  of 
being  a  compliance  with  the  command  of  our  Saviour 
to  his  friends  and  companions  at  his  Last  Supper, 
'  Do  this  in  remembrance  of  me,'  is  a  sacrifice  offered 
up  by  a  priest  who  performs  this  melodrama  before 
retiring  to  dine,  after  the  fatigues  of  the  day.  Thus 
we  learn  that  the  amice  represents  the  linen  rag  where- 
with the  Jews  blindfolded  our  Saviour;  the  alb^  the 
white  garment  in  which  Ilerod  clothed  him  ;  the  girdle^ 
stolcy  and  maniple,  the  cords  and  fetters  with  which  he 
was  bound ;  the  chasuble,  the  seamless  vest  of  Christ ; 
the  cross  emhroidered  on  its  back,  that  which  our  Lord 
carried  up  the  hill  of  Calvary. 

But  surely  this  is  enough  of  the  masquerade  dresses 
which  our  Ritualist  priests  use  for  the  purpose  of  paro- 
dying a  solemn  and  sacred  event  in  history. 

For  my  part,  I  am  ready  to  forgive  the  members 
of  an  ancient  and  venerable  Church  which,  in  the  dark 
middle  ages  of  Europe,  thought  to  symbolize  the  creed 
of  christians,  and  to  awaken  the  devotion  of  millions 
who  could  neither  read  nor  write  by  statues  ,to  attract 
worship,  and  by  pictures  to  represent  the  Virgin  Mary 


BITUALISM.  851 

and  the  disciples  of  Christ,  who  followed  his  preaching 
and  inculcated  his  doctrine. 

But  at  the  present  time  the  question  is  totally  altered. 
The  millions  who,  before  the  revival  of  letters,  could 
only  be  taught  by  signs  and  emblems,  have  now  been 
replaced  by  millions  who  have  learned  to  read  the 
Bible,  who  have  been  taught  the  words  of  Christ  in 
their  own  native  language,  and  are  no  longer  bound 
by  the  theology  of  subtle  logicians.  I  remember  once 
calling  upon  a  Spanish  canon  in  his  native  town.  I 
found  him  at  dinner,  and  he  kindly  invited  me  to  join 
him.  But  not  being  in  very  good  health,  I  declined  to 
drink  a  second  glass  of  wine.  '  What,'  he  said,  '  don't 
5'OU  know  the  syllogism :  "  Qui  bene  bibit  bene  dormit ; 
qui  dormit  non  peccat ;  qui  non  peccat  salvatus  erit  "  ?  ' 
He  told  me  that  this  syllogism,  though  popular  at  Sala- 
manca, was  a  silogismo  caneioso,  or,  in  other  words,  a 
hoax. 

But  I  believe  the  syllogism  was  quite  as  good  and 
as  sound  theology  as  many  of  the  dogmas  which  have 
pervaded  scholastic  theology. 

Indeed,  it  is  absurd  to  suppose  that  we  are  on  the 
brink  of  a  great  contest  between  those  who  have  learnt 
the  principles  of  the  Reformation  and  those  who  wi.>h 
to  lead  us  by  crooked  paths,  and  windows  that  shut  out 
the  light,  to  the  temples  where  truth  is  lost  amid  a 
blaze  of  light,  a  great  pomp  of  dresses,  .and  the  strains 
of  melodious  music. 

It  is  very  evident  that  the  disciples  of  the  Church 
of  Rome  wish  to  lead  us  from  confession  and  absolution 
to  the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation  ;  from  thence  to 
the  worship  of  images,  and  from  thence  to  all  the  abuses 
which  at  the  end  of  the  fifteenth  century  and  at  the 
beginning  of  the  sixteenth  excited  the  anger  and  the 
scorn  of  Luther,  Calvin,  Zwinglius,  and  others. 


352  RECOLLECTIONS  AND   SUGGESTIONS. 

We  may  now  define  the  difference  between  tlie 
Reformers  who  hold  to  the  fundamental  doctrines  of 
the  Reformation,  and  the  Ritualists,  whether  of  the 
Church  of  England  or  of  the  Church  of  Rome.  The 
difference  is,  then,  that  the  Reformers  hold  to  the  faith 
in  Christ,  not  as  explained  by  Thomas  Aquinas,  or 
Duns  Scotus,  or  even  by  Luther  and  Calvin,  but  as  laid 
down  by  Christ  himself  in  the  Gospels.  With  this 
faith  the  Reformers  combine  great  respect  for  the 
authority  of  Aristotle. 

The  Ritualists,  on  the  other  hand,  combine  faith  in 
Aristotle  with  great  respect  and  even  veneration  for 
the  character  of  Jesus  Christ.  The  primary  faith  of 
the  Reformers  is  in  the  words  of  Christ.  The  primary 
faith  of  the  Ritualists  is  in  Aristotle. 

It  is  not  doubtful  which  way  the  Protestants  of 
England  will  decide.  They  will  follow  in  the  footsteps 
of  the  Reformers. 

It  is  to  be  noted  that  the  sentiments  of  devotion 
awakened  by  fine  dresses,  fine  music,  and  dark  mys- 
teries, figured  in  symbols  and  ceremonies,  are  not 
confined  to  any  particular  religious  faith.  Devotion  to 
Mahomet,  or  to  Buddha,  may  be  excited  by  the  same 
means  which  prevail  with  the  Ritualists  of  England  in 
favor  of  the  name  of  Cln-ist. 

But  another  course  has  been  taken  by  the  leaders 
who  laid  the  foundation  of  what  we  in  England  call 
the  Reformation. 

It  has  been  the  object  of  the  English  Reformers, 
whether  attached  to  the  Established  Church  or  belong- 
ing to  the  various  bodies  of  Christians  known  as  the 
three  denominations  of  Presbyterians,  Baptists,  and 
Independents,  or  belonging  to  the  sect  of  Unitarians, 
or  to  various  other  religious  bodies  who  are  established 


RITUALISM.  353 

in  England,  to  inform  the  minds  and  consciences  of 
their  hearers  by  the  doctrine,  commandments,  and 
teaching  of  Christ. 

Luther  began  the  campaign  against  Rome  by  calling 
upon  men  publicly  to  read  the  Holy  Scriptures. 

The  theologians  of  the  Roman  Church  were  not  pre- 
pared to  meet  him  on  this  challenge.  Learned  doctors, 
who  bore  sway  as  theologians  at  Rome,  were  quite 
ignorant  of  the  Gospel,  and  while  they  could  contend 
in  favor  of  Thomas  Aquinas  against  Duns  Scotus,  in 
favor  of  Duns  Scotus  against  Melancthon  or  Zwinglius, 
they  could  not  venture  to  quote  the  words  of  Jesus 
Christ,  or  to  support  their  doctrines  by  the  words  of 
St.  John  or  of  St.  Paul.i 

Men,  however,  were  informed  by  the  New  Testa- 
ment, read  '  audibly  and  distinctly,'  that  Christ  taught 
his  disciples  to  love  all  men ;  that  a  man  ought  to  love 
his  neighbor  as  himself;  that  if  he  had  any  personal 
quarrel  with  any  man  he  should  seek  reconciliation, 
and  offer  to  forgive  them  who  had  trespassed  against 
him,  before  he  placed  his  gift  upon  the  altar. 

A  follower  of  Christ  would  likewise  be  taught  that 
a  Samaritan  guilty  of  schism  became  the  true  neighbor 
of  a  man  lying  wounded  and  naked,  by  attending  to 
his  wounds,  and  giving  money  to  provide  for  his  care 
and  sustenance. 

A  hearer  of  Christ's  word  would  also  be  taught  that 
of  two  men  who  went  into  the  temple  to  pray,  the  rich 
man  who  boasted  that  he  gave  tithes  of  all  he  possessed, 
and  that  he  was  not  as  other  men  were,  would  not  be 
so  surely  justified  as  the  man  who  said  humbly,  '  Lord, 
be  merciful  to  me  a  sinner.' 


1  Paolo  Sarpi. 
23 


354  RECOLLECTIONS  AND   SUGGESTIONS. 

He  would  likewise  hear  that  the  man  who  forgave 
trespasses  against  him,  and  not  he  who  refused  to  for- 
give, would  be  excused  and  pardoned.  Above  all,  he 
would  be  taught  that  love  between  man  and  man  was 
the  true  way  to  make  peace  prevail  on  the  earth.  He 
would  not,  indeed,  conceal  the  prediction  of  Christ  that 
mankind  would  persecute  those  who  taught  this  doc- 
trine, and  thereby  a  sword  and  not  good-will  would  be 
the  first  consequence  of  his  appearance  upon  earth. 
But  he  would  also  learn  that  the  song  of  the  angels 
who  proclaimed  on  earth  peace  and  good-will  would  be 
the  final  result  of  Christ's  teaching.  He  would  hear 
from  the  Bible  that  the  sabbath  was  made  for  man,  and 
not  man  for  the  sabbath. 

Beyond  all  these  lessons,  the  Reformers  we're  taught 
that  Christ  was  cruelly  put  to  death  by  a  degrading 
and  disgraceful  mode  of  punishment ;  that  he  gave  his 
life  for  mankind,  and  submitted  humbly  to  all  the  in- 
sults which  those  who  called  out  *  Crucify  him  !  Crucify 
him ! '  thought  were  the  due  punishment  of  a  person 
who  was  a  model  of  virtue,  of  kindness,  of  love  of  his 
kind. 

Is  there  not  something  to  excite  devotion  in  the 
repetition  of  a  narrative  so  sublime,  so  touching,  so  use- 
ful for  the  improvement  of  mankind?  Yet  more  than 
one  device  has  been  put  in  force  to  conceal  these  les- 
sons from  the  knowledge  of  mankind. 

It  may  be  said  that  the  Protestant  congregations 
of  England  may  adopt  the  music  and  the  pomp  of 
Ritualistic  service  and  still  attend  to  the  sublime  les- 
sons of  charity  and  humility  of  our  Lord.  This  is 
certainly  possible,  but  not  prol^able.  Those  who  adopt 
the  mummeries  of  the  Ritualists  are  apt  to  forget  that 
they  ought  not  to  boast  that  they  are  not  as  other  men 


RITUALISM.  355 

are,  and   to   reject   the  exclamation   of  the   publican, 
'  Lord,  be  merciful  to  me  a  sinner.' 

The  English  nation  must  choose  between  the  two. 
Either  they  must  adopt  the  Ritualistic  mode  of  wor- 
ship, and  set  aside  the  Acts  of  Parliament  by  which 
the  country  is  now  governed,  or  they  must,  with  the 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  adhere  to  the  principles 
of  the  glorious  Reformation  begun  by  Henr}^  VIII., 
and  established  by  his  daughter  Elizabeth,  Queen  of 
England  and  of  Ireland. 

There  is  one  gift  bestowed  by  Jesus  Christ  upon 
his  people  which  we  still  enjoy,  and  which  I  hope  we 
may  continue  to  enjoy. 

When  Jesus  Christ  was  asked  whether  he  w^as  the 
Saviour  for  whom  they  looked,  or  whether  they  should 
look  for  another,  he  gave  instances  of  the  miracles  he 
had  performed ;  that  the  blind  had  been  made  to  see, 
that  the  paralytic  had  been  told  to  take  up  his  bed  and 
walk,  and  that  even  the  dead  had  been  bidden  to  appear 
in  his  grave-clothes  with  life  restored. 

All  this  power  of  miracles  has  departed  from  us. 
We  do  not,  like  the  Roman  Church,  pretend  to  restore 
the  broken  limb  or  make  whole  the  wounded  body. 
But  there  was  one  concluding  sentence  in  Christ's 
declaration  which  we  still  preserve.  He  terminated 
his  message  by  saying,  '  and  the  poor  have  the  Gospel 
preached  to  them.'  This  we  preserve.  The  Bible 
Society  could  tell  how  many  copies  of  the  Gospel  they 
distribute  every  year  among  all  the  nations  of  the 
world.  Only  a  few  years  ago,  by  the  exertions  of  a 
zealous  minister  of  the  Gospel,  the  price  of  the  Bible 
was  reduced  in  Scotland  from  5s.  to  lOd. 

Thus  the  people  of  Great  Britain  have  inherited  a 
privilege  worthy  of  the  divine  author  of  the  religion 


856  RECOLLECTIONS  AND   SUGGESTIONS. 

which  has  its  name  and  its  teaching  from  Christ.  If 
the  British  nation  is  wise,  it  will  not  allow  the  Roman 
Church  with  its  infallible  head,  or  the  Ritualists  with 
their  mimic  ornaments,  nor  those  who  are  deaf  to  the 
teachings  of  Socrates  and  of  Cicero,  of  Bacon  and  of 
Newton,  to  deprive  them  of  the  inestimable  blessing 
of  the  Gospel. 

From  this  great  and  sublime  question  we  may  pro- 
ceed to  matters  which  have  obtained  of  late  years  more 
or  less  of  public  attention. 

In  preparing  a  conclusion  to  '  Recollections  and  Sug- 
gestions,' which  have  been  the  object  of  memory  or 
meditation  for  sixty  years,  it  is  fit  that  I  should  make 
ax  general  avowal  of  the  impression  I  have  received 
with  regard  to  my  own  part  in  public  life,  and  that 
which  others  have  taken  with  whom  I  have  been  associ- 
ated, or  to  whom  I  have  been  opposed. 

My  persuasion  is  that  I  have  been  received  with 
quite  as  much  favor  as  I  deserved.  I  tliink  what  I 
have  done  well  has  been  honestly  supported  ;  and  that 
where  my  measures  have  miscarried,  the  failure  has 
been  owing  not  to  undue  animosity  or  malignant  mis- 
representation, but  to  errors  which  I  have  committed 
from  mistaken  judgment  or  a  mistaken  appreciation  of 
facts. 

I  believe  I  may  say,  with  many  other  of  the  leading 
men  who,  since  the  Revolution  of  1G89,  have  hud  the 
direction  of  public  affairs,  that  my  ends  have  been 
honest,  and  that  I  have  looked  to  the  happiness  of  my 
countrymen  as  the  object  to  which  my  efforts  ought  to 
bo  directed. 

Speaking  generally,  and  with  some  exceptions,  I  am 
willing  to  give  the  same  testimony  to  those  with  whom 
I  have   been   associated   and   to  the  chief  leaders   to 


k    UNiV£RSITY  J 

CROMWELL'S  PLAN  OP  REPRESENTATION.        357 

whom  I  have  been  opposed.  I  relied,  and  I  believe 
justly  relied,  on  the  integrity  and  sound  principles  of 
Lord  Althorp ;  and  while  I  believe  that  Sir  Robert 
Peel  erred  from  over-caution,  I  see  no  reason  to  doubt 
that  his  great  capacity  was  at  all  times  employed  for 
what  he  believed  to  be  the  welfare  of  his  country. 
Indeed,  I  do  not  doubt  that  with  the  exception  of  the 
small  band  who  were  said  to  occupy  the  Cave  of  Adul- 
1am,  the  parties  I  have  had  to  act  with  or  to  confront 
have  been  animated  with  the  sincere  desire  to  devote 
their  talents  to  the  public  good. 

Among  the  questions  which  may  or  may  not  occupy 
the  attention  of  the  House  of  Commons  in  the  approach- 
ing sessions,  the  question  of  parliamentary  reform  de- 
serves to  be  noted.  It  was  inevitable  that  the  growth 
of  large  towns,  the  seats  of  the  manufactures  of  cotton, 
of  wool,  and  of  linen,  could  not  be  permanentl}^  excluded 
from  that  wliich  called  itself  the  Commons  House 
of  Parliament ;  and  that  the  representation  of  the 
people  which  excluded  all  those  seats  of  manufacture 
could  not  be,  as  the  Duke  of  Wellington  supposed,  a 
perfect  system  of  representation.  We  to  a  great  ex- 
tent remedied  the  evil  in  1832.  But  there  is  an  obser- 
vation which  cannot  escape  either  legislators  or  their 
constituents. 

When  Oliver  Cromwell  was  Lord  Protector  of  the 
United  Kingdom,  he  framed  a  new  instrument  of  gov- 
ernment, and  united  with  it  a  new  sj^stem  of  repre- 
sentation. Disregarding  the  divisions  which  separated 
Scotland  from  England,  and  Ireland  from  both,  he 
framed  a  scheme  by  which  the  counties  of  the  three 
nations  should  have  four,  six,  eight,  or  ten  members 
each,  as  the  circumstances  of  the  time  seemed  to  de- 
mand, by  which  great  towns  were  represented  by  one 
member  each,  and  small  boroughs  were  totally  omitted. 


858  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

In  the  list  of  members  I  find  for  Middlesex  four  mem- 
bers, for  the  city  of  I^ondon  six,  for  Westminster  two. 
The  number  of  members  for  Devonsliire  I  find  to  be 
eleven,  for  Plymouth  two,  Exeter  two,  Totness  one, 
Barnstable  two,  Honiton  one,  Dartmouth  one.  For 
Cambridgeshire  I  find  four  members,  for  Cambridge 
town  one,  and  for  Cambridge  University  one  ;  for  the 
Isle  of  Ely  two.  For  Lincolnshire  I  find  ten  members, 
one  for  Stamford,  Boston  one.  In  Lancashire  the  num- 
ber of  members  is  four,  but  there  is  one  for  Manchester, 
which,  after  the  restoration  of  1660  till  1832,  had  no 
member.  For  Liverpool  there  is  one  member,  one  for 
Preston,  and  one  for  Lancaster. 

The  representation  was  extended  to  Scotland  and 
Ireland  on  the  same  principles  which  were  applied  to 
England,  but  Cromwell's  dislike  to  Scotland,  of  which 
he  said  that  he  was  told  '  that  it  was  a  poor  country 
inhabited  by  honest  people,'  but  that  he  found  that  the 
country  was  not  poor,  and  that  the  people  were  not 
honest,  was  visible  in  this  scheme  of  representation. 

Ireland  had  been  too  recently  ground  down  by  civil 
war  to  admit  of  a  fair  representation.  But  of  this  whole 
scheme  Lord  Clarendon  says  '  that  it  Avas  generally 
thought  a  warrantable  alteration,  and  fit  to  be  made  in 
better  times.' 

It  is  a  marked  feature  in  this  scheme  of  representation, 
that  the  boroughs  which  in  those  days  were  small  were 
totally  omitted. 

I  confess  it  appears  to  me  that  if  the  question  of 
parliamentary  reform  is  again  touched,  Parliament  ought 
not  to  content  itself  with  giving  to  householders  in 
counties  the  same  right  of  voting  which  they  have  in 
boroughs,  lopping  off  a  few  small  towns,  but  that  the 
scheme  of  Cromwell  should  be  revived  in  these  better 
times. 


THE  PRESENT  MINISTRY.  359 

The  difficulties  which  prevented  a  union  with  Scot- 
land for  so  long  a  time  after  the  Restoration,  and  the 
mismanagement  which  so  long  afflicted  Ireland,  ought 
to  be  kept  out  of  sight  in  a  large  and  capacio  iis  view  of 
the  union  of  Great  Britain  and  Ireland.  The  populous 
counties  of  Ireland,  with  her  cities  of  Belfast  and  Cork, 
ought  to  have  a  fair  representation,  and  the  miserable 
small  towns  of  Ireland  ought  to  be  at  once  disfran- 
chised. 

As  the  scheme  of  Disestablishment  and  Disendowment 
of  Churches,  which  was  so  popular  with  the  Cabinet  a 
few  years  ago,  seems  to  have  been  now  finally  relin- 
quished, Ireland  ought  to  have  for  her  Roman  Catholic 
people  an  establishment  of  parish  priests  governed  by  a 
single  Metropolitan,  as  the  Church  of  England  is  gov- 
erned by  its  Metropolitans  of  Canterbury  and  of  York, 
and  Scotland  by  her  General  Assembly  of  clerical  min- 
isters and  lay  members,  which  meets  every  year  under 
the  authority  of  a  high  commissioner  appointed  by  the 
Crown,  and  which  invokes  the  spirit  and  the  guidance 
of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 

Whether  a  Tory  Ministry  will  ever  undertake  such 
a  task,  or  whether  a  Whig  Ministry  will  ever  again  be 
called  to  the  councils  of  the  Sovereign,  I  am  unable  to 
say  ;  I  only  wish  to  point  out  what  in  my  opinion  the 
public  interest  demands. 

There  are  many  topics  to  which  the  attention  of  the 
present  Ministry  must  be  directed.  I  think  myself  they 
would  have  done  better  if,  instead  of  introducing  a 
number  of  important  measures  in  the  late  session  of 
Parliament,  they  had  made  an  excuse  of  the  suddenness 
with  which  the  burden  of  government  had  been  thrown 
upon  them,  and  had  reserved  for  the  coming  session  of 
1875  the  development  of  their  whole  foreign  and  domes- 


360  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

tic  policy.  Twelve  gentlemen  who,  though  bound  by 
party  ties,  have  been  acting  independently  for  five  or 
six  years  are  not  at  once  inspired  with  oracular  systems 
of  policy  ;  with  a  regular  plan  of  finance  ;  with  a  plan 
for  the  army  and  navy ;  or  with  a  judgment  upon  the 
precedents  left  by  their  predecessors,  distinguishing 
those  acts  which  may  be  accepted  as  permanent  altera- 
tions and  those  which  may  admit  of  alteration  or  rever- 
sal. The  late  Lord  Brougham,  for  instance,  had  devoted 
much  attention  to  endowments.  Many  of  these,  such 
as  hospitals  for  the  cure  of  leprosy,  and  sums  to  be 
devoted  to  the  redemption  of  captives  made  by  the  Dey 
of  Algiers,  might  properly  be  otherwise  applied.  But 
it  is  not  enough  to  say  that  a  man  who  devoted  the  sav- 
ings of  a  long  life  to  the  education  of  the  poor  in  the 
city  of  London  or  Westminster,  was  a  pious  founder,  in 
order  to  disendow  his  schools,  and  make  the  caprice  of 
a  Minister  the  new  rule  for  charitable  foundations. 

There  are  in  the  air  of  public  opinion,  besides  errors 
to  be  corrected  with  temper  and  moderation,  other 
schemes  which  have  no  solid  foundation,  and  are  sure 
to  pass  away  with  the  bubbles  of  the  day's  froth ;  for 
instance,  certain  unions  have  declared  that  if  farmers 
had  more  capital  and  more  agricultural  skill,  the  land 
would  have  a  greater  produce  and  the  country  be  more 
flourishing.  This  is  quite  true.  But  who  is  to  furnish 
the  capital,  and  who  the  agricultural  skill  ?  The  unions 
will  not  furnish  the  one,  and  are  unable  to  furnish 
the  otlier.  The  inexorable  law  of  demand  and  supply 
extinguishes  the  whole  scheme. 

A  farmer  in  Scotland,  with  his  nineteen  or  twenty- 
one  years'  lease,  accumulates  profits  sufficient  to  become 
the  tenant  and  the  improver  of  a  new  farm.  Thus 
gradually  and  thus  surely  does  agriculture  improve,  and 


SCOTCH  FARMING.  361 

thus  insensibly  will  the  landlords  and  tenants  in  Eng- 
land accumulate  the  wealth  and  the  science  which  have 
distinguished  Scotland. 

When  Sir  Robert  Peel  imposed  the  income-tax  in 
1842,  several  farmers  of  Berwickshire  and  the  neigh- 
boring counties  intrusted  to  my  hands  a  petition,  pray- 
ing to  have  the  proportion  of  income-tax  paid  by  tenants 
lowered.  On  looking  over  the  list  of  the  tenants  who 
signed  their  names  to  the  petition,  I  found  some  who 
paid  2,000Z.  a  year  of  rent,  and  others  who  paid  1,500?. 
and  1,200Z.  yearly.  The  landlords  and  tenants  of  Eng- 
land have  not  generally  acquired  the  spirit  or  the 
knowledge  which  would  enable  them  to  cultivate  their 
farms  well.  I  have  heard  that  on  the  estate  of  Londes- 
borough,  sold  by  the  late  Duke  of  Devonshire,  the  in- 
curia  of  low  rents  and  lazy  farming  produced  at  the 
period  of  the  sale  bad  cultivation  and  contented  indo- 
lence. But  these  changes  are  not  to  be  made  on  a 
sudden ;  '  Rome  was  not  built  in  a  day,'  says  the 
English  proverb.  '  No  se  tom6  Zamora,  En  una  hora,' 
says  the  Spaniard. 

With  regard  to  our  security  from  foreign  invasion, 
it  must  be  said,  in  the  first  place,  that  the  invasion  of 
the  British  Isles  would  require  immense  preparation, 
and  that  immense  preparation  could  not  not  be  made 
without  such  expense,  so  many  ships,  and  so  many  regi- 
ments, that  the  population  of  Great  Britain  would  have 
full  time  to  organize  their  forces,  and  to  make  the  battle 
of  Dorking  a  signal  victory  for  the  British  against  an 
invading  army. 

We  may,  therefore,  put  .  out  of  the  question  the 
dangers  of  an  invasion  of  the  British  Islands  by  a  for- 
eign enemy.  We  must  call  to  mind,  however,  that  we 
have  a  land  frontier  of  1,200  miles  in  North  America, 


362  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

open  in  many  passages,  and  a  land  frontier  of  12,000 
miles  in  our  Indian  Empire,  which  good  military  judges 
have  pronounced  to  be  defensible  at  every  point  of  its 
vast  extent.  It  is  worth  while,  however,  to  weigh  and 
estimate  the  dangers  to  which  our  Empire  may  be  ex- 
posed both  in  the  West  and  in  the  East. 

There  occurs  frorn  time  to  time  in  the  press  of  the 
United  States  an  explosion  of  ambition  and  envy, 
prompted  by  the  desire  of  adding  the  Dominion  of 
Canada  to  the  territory  of  the  United  States. 

That  is,  however,  far  from  being  a  deliberate  in- 
tention of  aggrandizement  on  the  j)art  of  the  Great 
Western  Republic. 

Mr.  Cobden,  who  was  friendly  to  our  giant  son,  ex- 
pressed his  opinion  that  if  the  lust  of  dominion  should 
ever  possess  the  government  and  the  people  of  the 
United  States,  they  would  look  rather  to  the  south  than 
to  the  north  for  the  gratification  of  their  ambition.  He 
pointed  out  that  the  territory  to  the  north  gave  a  return 
to  the  efforts  of  a  laborious  and  frugal  workman  of  only 
moderate  crops  of  corn,  while  the  great  table-land  of 
Mexico  produced  cotton  and  sugar,  and  her  mines  were 
rich  with  silver.  He,  therefore,  reckoned  the  risk  of  a 
war  with  Great  Britain,  which  might,  as  in  1812,  prove 
destructive  to  the  trade  of  the  United  States,  while  the 
land  of  Mexico,  divided  by  civil  war,  would,  as  in  the 
days  of  General  Scott,  be  easily  subdued  and  as  easily 
held  in  subjection. 

I  know  not  Avliether  he  was  acquainted  with  the 
saying  of  a  French  statesman,  engaged  in  framing 
the  treaty  of  Versailles  of  1703,  that  those  who  were 
masters  of  North  America  would,  in  the  end,  be  ma8tei*3 
of  the  South. 

Be  this  as  it  may,  the  honor  of  the  British  Crown 


RUSSIAN  AGGRESSION.  oG3 

is  pledged  to  defend  the  Queen's  dominions  in  North 
America  with  the  utmost  forces  of  the  Empire  ;  and  it 
is  very  improbable  that,  with  such  a  prospect  before 
them,  the  President  and  Secretary  of  State  at  Wash- 
ington will  coolly  contemplate  a  hostile  invasion  of  the 
Queen's  possessions  in  Canada. 

It  is  true,  that  the  late  Government  committed  a 
folly  when  they  evacuated  the  new  and  expensive  for- 
tifications at  Quebec,  and  abandoned  the  garrison  at 
Halifax.  Very  few  years  have  elapsed  since  part  of  the 
garrison  at  Halifax  furnished  the  means  of  preserving 
the  Island  of  Jamaica  to  the  British  Crown,  and  it  is 
not  likely  that  a  Canadian  garrison  would  be  dispatched 
to  Jamaica  with  the  same  readiness,  or  act  with  equal 
efficiency,  against  a  negro  insurrection. 

But  this  error  can  easily  be  repaired  by  a  Government 
which  is  prepared  to  defend  the  Queen's  possessions, 
and  which  has  a  proper  sense  of  the  value  of  British 
honor.  I  should,  therefore,  pay  little  regard  to  the 
speeches  which  in  the  United  States  are  called  '  Bun- 
come,'  and  which  are  as  void  of  meaning  as  they  are 
hollow  in  sound. 

I  have  said  that  the  British  Empire  of  India  has  a 
frontier  of  12,000  miles,  and  is,  according  to  the  judg- 
ment of  military  men,  in  every  point  of  that  frontier, 
defensible.  But  still,  the  commander  of  800,000  men, 
the  autocrat  of  a  vast  Empire,  possessed  with  a  spirit 

Like  Macedonia's  madman  or  the  Swede, 

may  be  tempted  by  the  riches  of  India,  by  the  rumors 
of  disaffection  to  British  rule,  by  intrigues  constantly 
springing  up,  and  by  the  hope  of  glory  to  the  Russian 
name,  to  undertake  the  vast  enterprise  of  depriving 
Great  Britain  of  her  Indian  possessions,  and  annexing 


364  RECOLLECTIONS  AND   SUGGESTIONS. 

them  to  the  crown  of  the  Muscovite.  Let  us  consider 
what  are  the  reasons  to  be  thrown  into  the  opposite 
scale. 

In  the  first  place,  there  is  the  danger  and  the  dis- 
grace of  initiating  a  great  disturbance  of  the  peace  of 
the  world.  When  Napoleon  failed  in  his  task  of  com- 
pleting the  conquest  of  Europe,  England  became  the 
friend  of  Russia,  and  for  more  than  half  a  century  the 
bonds  of  friendship,  broken  only  by  the  blunder  of 
the  Crimean  war,  have  united  the  two  nations. 

It  will  be  said  by  the  surrounding  spectators,  '  Asia  is 
surely  large  enough  to  contain  two  European  powers.' 
Each  power  is  strong  and  independent ;  they  are  not, 
like  Caesar  and  Pompey,  contendhig  for  rule  or  the 
same  empire.  Russia  has  carried  her  conquests  to  the 
shore  of  the  Black  Sea,  and  her  power  is  only  bounded 
by  an  ocean  limit  and  the  river  Danube.  Her  trade  in 
Central  Asia  is  not  disturbed  by  England. 

Why,  it  will  be  said,  destroy  peace,  the  greatest  bless- 
ing of  nations,  by  new  aspirations,  by  new  alliances, 
and  by  making  an  open  wound  on  the  fair  body  of  Eu- 
rope ? 

Other  considerations  must  intei'vene.  England  can 
at  any  time  borrow,  on  moderate  terms,  one  hundred 
millions  in  tlie  market  of  London.  The  capitalists  of 
Europe  would  expect  that  if  the  Russian  Emperor  would 
be  ready  to  borrow  he  would  be  equally  ready  to  violate 
his  engagements.  A  high  rate  of  interest  would  be 
demanded,  and  the  people  of  Russia  would  complain  of 
unwonted  and  unexpected  burdens.  Nor  is  the  state 
of  a  large  military  empire,  a  stratocracy,  as  it  was  for- 
merly termed,  without  its  separate  dangei-s. 

If  Alexander  the  Great  had  lived  longer  he  might 
have  found  his  favorite  generals  rebel  against  his  au- 


THE   INDIAN  MUTINY.  365 

tliority.  When  Napoleon  the  Great  sent  his  legions 
into  Portuguese  territory,  they  were  greatly  inclined, 
and  even  conspired,  to  make  one  of  his  marshals  King 
of  Portugal. 

Dangers  such  as  these,  obstacles  such  as  these,  might 
stop  the  path  of  a  Hannibal,  but  Hannibal  was  a  soldier 
of  fortune  sworn  to  hate  the  Roman  name.  A  Czar  of 
Russia,  filled  with  anxieties  every  morning,  and  dreading 
every  night  the  fate  of  Peter  or  of  Paul,  might  well  be 
induced  to  prefer  the  ease  and  securit}^  of  a  tranquil 
reign  to  the  prospect  of  unceasing  dangers  and  an  un- 
interrupted anxiety. 

But  I  am  not  so  very  confident  of  our  security  as  to 
advise  that  any  precautions  should  be  neglected. 

It  was  well  said  by  Tippoo  Saib, '  that  what  he  dreaded 
was  not  so  much  the  British  army  then  in  India,  as  the 
British  army  that  might  arrive  from  England.' 

None  of  the  advantages  that  modern  science  has  fur- 
nished in  the  way  of  weapons,  of  railroads,  of  discipline, 
and  intelligent  officers,  should  be  neglected. 

Lord  Salisbury  has  well  advised  that  a  railway  along 
the  course  of  the  Indus  should  enable  the  Governor- 
General  of  India  to  pour  an  overwhelming  force  on  the 
points  most  likely  to  be  threatened  by  an  enemy. 

The  genius  of  Clive  and  the  unscrupulous  policy  of 
Warren  Hastings,  the  far-seeing  view  of  Lord  Wellesley 
and  the  peaceable  watchfulness  of  Lord  Minto,  have 
created,  have  strengthened,  and  have  preserved  our 
Indian  Empire. 

I  cannot  myself  believe  that  we  shall  be  overcome  in 
the  effort  to  maintain  that  which  we  have  with  so  much 
difficulty  acquired.  The  mutiny  of  the  Indian  army 
threatened  our  Empire  with  extinction.  A  wise  Viceroy 
guided  our  councils  with  unshaken  firmness.     A  skilful 


366  RECOLLECTIONS  AND   SUGGESTIONS. 

general  traversed  vast  tracts  of  the  country  with  victory 
in  his  hand  ;  intrepid  soldiers  rescued  beleaguered  gar- 
risons. Beautiful  women  implored  their  husbands  to 
put  them  to  death,  rather  than  leave  them  victims  to 
infamy  and  dishonor. 

By  such  virtues  the  Indian  Empire  was  saved  ;  but 
it  would  be  idle  to  suppose  that  such  an  Empire  can  be 
maintained  by  virtues  less  resolute,  by  qualities  less 
exalted,  by  courage  less  invincible,  than  the  virtues, 
the  qualities,  and  the  courage  which  have  founded  and 
preserved  it. 

I  have  stated  in  the  House  of  Lords,  that  by  the 
Treaty  of  Washington  the  honor  of  the  British  nation 
was  tarnished,  her  character  lowered,  and  her  interests 
endangered.  But  as  every  prominent  candidate  at  the 
late  general  election  had  blamed  the  foreign  policy  of 
Mr.  Gladstone's  Cabinet,  and  as  that  general  election 
had  for  its  result  a  majority  of  fifty  for  Mr.  Disraeli  in 
the  place  of  a  majority  of  sixty  for  Mr.  Gladstone,  I 
also  stated  that  in  my  opinion  the  British  people,  by 
giving  a  majority  to  the  Conservative  candidates,  had 
passed  a  sentence  of  condemnation  against  the  authoi-s 
of  the  concession  which  had  tarnished  the  honor,  low- 
ered the  character,  endangered  the  interests  of  the 
British  nation. 

In  185G,  England  obtained  at  Paris  a  treaty  by 
which  Russia  bound  hei-self  to  make  the  Black  Sea  a 
neutral  sea,  and  not  to  send  her  ships  of  war  to  navi- 
gate that  sea.  Considering  that  a  hirge  number  of  the 
subjects  of  Russia  live  on  the  borders  of  tlie  Black  Sea, 
this  was  a  very  harsh  and  unusual  stipulation.  No  one 
would  have  been  surprised  to  learn  that  Russia,  when 
her  naval  and  military  losses  were  repaired,  had  asked 
tlie  Powers  of  Europe  to  meet  and  to  modify  that  harsh 


THE  BLACK  SEA  TREATY.  867 

condition  of  the  Treaty  of  1856,  to  whicli  all  the  prin- 
cipal Powers  had  agreed.  Nothing  could  have  been 
more  reasonable  than  such  a  request.  Is  that  Avhat  she 
did  ?  did  she  propose  that  the  Powers  should  come 
together  under  the  leadership  of  Great  Britain  ?  Quite 
the  contrary:  Prince  Gortchakoff,  on  behalf  of  the 
Emperor  of  Russia,  declared  this  humiliating  part  of 
the  Treaty  of  Paris  to  be  null  and  void.  He  declared 
it  would  no  longer  be  submitted  to  by  his  Imperial 
master. 

It  is  true  that  a  conference  took  place,  and  that  a 
condition  was  inserted  in  the  articles,  according  to 
which,  in  case  of  the  violation  of  the  other  parts  of  the 
Treaty  of  1856,  England  and  France  would  be  at 
liberty  to  assist  Turkey  by  their  naval  power.  This 
was  to  put  a  decent  mask  on  the  harsh  features  of  the 
Russian  dictator.  But  it  seems  to  be  admitted,  that  if 
Russia  finds  any  treaty  to  which  she  has  given  her 
public  and  solemn  assent  injurious  to  her  interests,  she 
is  at  liberty  to  declare  that  treaty  null  and  void,  and  to 
proceed  as  if  it  did  not  exist. 

For  the  injuries  to  property  inflicted  by  the  'Ala- 
bama' on  American  merchant  vessels,  an  ample  com- 
pensation, not  to  say  an  extravagant  and  inordinate 
compensation,  of  upwards  of  three  millions  sterling  has 
been  paid,  and  I  w^ill  not  say  any  thing  further  upon 
this  subject. 

Eighty-five  years  ago,  the  French  nation  determined 
to  reform  its  constitution,  and  to  aim  at  the  blessings 
of  a  free  government.  For  eighty-five  years  they  have 
struggled  in  vain ;  they  have  tried  putting  to  death, 
without  form  of  trial,  the  highest  of  their  nobility,  the 
fairest  ladies  of  their  aristocracy,  the  bravest  of  their 
generals,  the  most  accomplished  of  their  men  of  science, 


368  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

the  most  virtuous  of  their  princesses,  and  the  best  of 
all  classes.  Robespierre  declared  that  200,000  heads 
must  fall  before  France  could  be  free  and  happy.  They 
put  him  to  death,  and  interrupted  the  reign  of  terror. 
They  then  accepted  as  their  ruler  a  great  military  chief 
who  governed  tyrannically,  and  carried  600,000  men  to 
Moscow  to  perish  in  an  insane  expedition.  The  nation 
then  put  him  aside,  and  restored  the  brother  of  Louis 
XVI.  He  governed  like  Charles  II.,  caring  nothing 
for  moral  principles,  but  understanding  his  own  enjoy- 
ments, and  delighting  in  witty  conversation.  I  have 
heard  Prince  Talleyrand  describe  the  scene  of  his 
death-bed.  Charles  X.,  his  successor,  was,  like  James 
XL,  a  bigot,  and  it  was  part  of  his  religion  to  break 
faith  with  his  subjects. 

I  was  riding  in  Hyde  Park  at  Easter,  1830,  with  the 
Duke  of  Laval,  the  French  ambassador,  when  I  said 
to  him,  '  AVe  are  going  to  have  a  revolution  in  France.* 
*  What,'  he  said,  '  are  we  going  to  have  a  Republic  ? '  I 
said,  *  No,  you  will  have  the  Duke  of  Orleans  as  j^our 
king.'  I  knew  what  was  about  to  happen  from  living 
much  with  the  French  Whigs. 

One  of  the  cleverest  of  them  had  said  at  dinner  when 
I  was  present,  *  None  but  so  stupid  a  king  as  Charles  X. 
would  have  appointed  as  his  Minister  so  stupid  a  man 
as  the  Prince  of  Polignac'  The  event  occurred  as  I 
had  expected,  and  at  the  end  of  July  the  Duke  of 
Orleans  was  made  King  of  the  French,  but  he  neglected 
the  maxim  of  one  of  the  ablest  of  French  statesmen, 
'  not  to  govern  too  much.'  He  attempted  to  govern  by 
corruption,  but  not  the  corruption  of  Sir  Robert  Wal- 
pole,  with  a  great  end  in  view.  The  corruption  of 
Louis  Philippe  was  a  sordid  traffic  of  places  and  honors, 
of  dinners  and  entertainments,  in  order  to  control  the 


FRANCE.  369 

members  of  an  assembly  chosen  by  200,000  electors  for 
the  whole  of  France. 

Thiers  has  lately  pointed  out  this  fault,  which  led 
to  the  abdication  of  the  citizen  King.  Had  the  French 
been  English  they  would  have  kept  their  King,  but 
compelled  him  to  adopt  reform. 

The  subsequent  events  in  France  are  well  known. 
The  choice  of  the  French  nation  now  lies  between 
several  alternatives.  One  recommended  b}^  M.  Thiers, 
and  favored  by  a  large  popular  support,  would  consist 
of  confirming  and  consolidating  the  present  form  of 
government,  with  a  President  chosen  for  a  term  of 
years,  a  senate  or  House  of  Lords  calculated  to  give 
steadiness  to  the  action  of  the  Representative  Assembly, 
and  laws  intended  to  perpetuate  the  public  liberties  of 
the  nation. 

Its  advocates  affirm  that  this  form  of  government 
would  institute  and  maintain  a  Conservative  Republic. 
Its  adversaries  deu}^  that  a  Republic  in  France  can  ever 
be  conservative ;  they  say  it  would  always  be  violent 
and  revolutionary,  and  they  point  to  the  examples  of 
1793  and  of  1873  with  a  shudder,  to  express  their  fears 
and  confirm  their  objections. 

I  do  not  venture  to  give  a  decided  opinion  upon  a 
judgment  which  must,  after  all,  depend  on  the  will  of 
a  nation  so  numerous  and  so  enlightened  as  that  of 
France  ;  but  I  will  not  conceal  my  opinion  upon  another 
alternative  which  is  about  to  be  submitted  to  the  deci- 
sion of  the  French  nation;  that  alternative  involves  the 
restoration  of  the  French  Empire,  with  its  despotic  gov- 
ernment and  its  passion  for  foreign  wars. 

Napoleon  I.  was  a  man  of  the  most  extraordinary 
talents  for  strategy  and  tactics  in  war,  and  for  adminis- 
tration in  peace.     His  preparations  for  war  are  related 

24 


3T0  RECOLLECTIONS   AND   SUGGESTIONS. 

in  detail  in  the  history  of  Thiers,  and  show  an  energy 
and  activity  by  day  and  night  which  have  never  been 
equalled  by  kings  the  most  celebrated  for  their  warlike 
achievements,  or  by  the  most  famous  generals  who  have 
led  the  armies  of  ambitious  sovereigns.  In  peace,  his 
great  maxim  of  administration  was  '  that  every  thing 
should  be  done  for  the  people,  but  nothing  by  the 
people.'  Whether  a  man  should  be  raised  to  the  highest 
honors  and  intrusted  with  the  highest  commands,  or 
whether  he  should  be  put  to  death  without  trial  and 
without  inquiry.  Napoleon  thought  ought  to  be  left  to 
his  sole  will  and  his  sole  decision.  It  was  said  of  him 
by  a  woman  of  genius,  '  he  traversed  crimes  and  virtues 
as  he  traversed  mountains  and  rivers,  because  they  were 
on  his  road.' 

Napoleon  III.  had  neither  the  talents  nor  the  energy, 
neither  the  errors  nor  the  ambition,  of  his  uncle.  For 
a  long  time  he  followed  the  path  of  peace,  maintained 
friendly  relations  with  the  great  enemy  of  his  prede- 
cessor, and  sought  in  the  lessons  of  political  economy 
the  road  to  riches  and  to  peace.  But  the  curse  of  his 
family  was  upon  him.  We  have  found  it  recorded  that 
Napoleon  I.  had  declared  to  his  brother  that  if  France 
had  her  natural  frontiers  he  would  abide  by  a  treaty  of 
peace ;  but  if  she  had  not  those  frontiers,  he  would 
make  war  upon  the  first  convenient  opportunity.  Thus, 
after  twenty  years  of  successful  power,  Napoleon  III. 
made  a  war  the  most  unjust,  the  most  senseless,  the 
most  ill-prepared,  and  the  worst  conducted  which  this 
generation  has  seen.  The  omens  which  attend  upon 
such  a  war  are  fearfid.  At  the  beginning  of  June, 
1815,  Napoleon  I.  reckoned  with  certainty  upon  enter- 
ing Brussels  before  the  month  was  over.  On  June  18 
he   was  defeated  at  Waterloo.     In  the  beginning  of 


PARLIAMENTARY  REFORM.  871 

July,  1870,  Napoleon  III.  announced  to  his  army  the 
approaching  capture  of  all  the  fortresses  on  the  left 
Lank  of  the  Rhine.  At  the  beginning  of  September 
he  capitulated  with  all  his  troops,  and  was  dethroned 
by  force  at  Paris.  These  precedents  are  surely  enough 
to  induce  the  French  nation  not  again  to  place  a  mem- 
ber of  the  family  of  Bonaparte  on  the  throne  of  France. 
The  one  hundred  days  of  1815  are  commemorated  with 
the  battle  of  Waterloo.  The  war  of  1870  is  associated 
in  our  lively  recollection  with  the  defeat  and  fall  of  the 
Second  Empire.  The  French  nation  may  well  shrink 
from  the  fear  of  incurring  a  second  Waterloo,  or  from 
being  exposed  to  a  renewal  of  the  surrender  of  Sedan. 

Whatever  may  be  the  mature  decision  of  the  French 
nation,  the  other  Powers  of  Europe  are  sufficiently 
warned ;  England  and  Italy,  Germany  and  Prussia, 
Austria  and  Russia  will  do  well,  when  the  Imperial 
Eagle  flies  from  the  towers  of  Notre  Dame,  to  make 
treaties  of  alliance  and  prepare  for  action. 

I  leave  to  future  consideration  the  measures  that 
will  be  necessary. 

Various  events,  to  which  it  is  needless  to  recur,  have 
since  prevented  the  introduction  of  a  complete  measure 
of  reform.  In  1867,  Mr.  Disraeli,  then  Prime  Minis- 
ter, proposed  the  law  of  the  right  of  election  in  boroughs 
to  a  simple  rated  household  suffrage,  and  this  proposal, 
with  the  addition  made  by  Lord  Cairns  of  a  minority 
clause,  borrowed  from  the  Bill  of  1854,  was  adopted 
by  both  Houses  of  Parliament. 

How,  then,  do  we  stand  at  present  ? 

Let  us  first  consider  the  immediate  requirements  of 
political  expediency,  and  next  what  is  fitted  to  the 
permanent  welfare  of  the  country. 

With  regard  to   the  first  of  these    questions,   it  is 


B72  RECOLLECTIONS  AND  SUGGESTIONS. 

obvious  that  there  are  two  demands,  one  of  which  has 
already  received  much  popular  support,  and  which  was 
thrown  open  by  Mr.  Gladstone  to  any  member  who 
chose  to  take  it  up  —  this  was  the  admission  of  rated 
householders  to  vote  in  counties  as  they  are  now  admit- 
ted to  do  in  boroughs. 

The  other  demand  which  is  put  forward  by  the 
Radical  party  is  a  further  disfranchisement  of  small 
boroughs.  My  own  opinion  is,  that  if  ever  there 
should  come  a  time  when  public  opinion  should  be 
favorable  to  the  destruction  of  the  small  boroughs 
and  the  admission  of  householders  to  vote  in  counties, 
it  will  be  well  not  to  make  some  paltry  changes  which 
would  whet  the  appetite  for  fresh  designs,  but  to  make 
a  warrantable  alteration  which  may  stand  the  test  of 
time,  and  be  fitted  to  serve  the  purposes  of  the  coming 
generation. 

For  this  purpose,  it  is  well  to  look  back  to  the  pro- 
ject of  Oliver  Cromwell.  His  frame  of  government 
provided  for  a  protector  who,  upon  his  death,  was  to 
be  replaced  by  another  chief  of  the  State,  to  be  elected 
likewise  for  life. 

What  part  of  CromwelFs  plan  of  representation  Lord 
Clarendon  would  have  thought  fit  to  adopt  in  better 
times  is  quite  uncertain,  but  it  is  obvious  that  Cromwell 
was  a  man  of  large  conceptions,  and  that  if  he  had  had 
any  one  fit  to  succeed  him  in  the  Protectorate  he  might 
have  founded  a  commonwealth  which  John  Milton  and 
Algernon  Sydney  would  have  contributed  to  support, 
the  one  with  his  extensive  learning,  the  other  with  his 
high  spirit,  and  both  by  their  lofty  and  unblemished 
characters. 

Those  things  are  past ;  we  have  happily  contrived 
to  join  with  the  rights  of  hereditary  Monarchy  as  large 


RELIGIOUS  LIBERTY.  373 

a  sclieme  of  popular  freedom  as  any  of  the  ancient 
Republics  ever  devised.  That  it  may  long  endure,  is 
my  fervent  and  humble  prayer. 

I  will  not  attempt  to  review  the  changes  which  have 
taken  place  in  Europe  from  the  days  of  Charles  V.  and 
Louis  XI.  to  the  present  time.  But  there  is  some  ad- 
vantage in  having  attained  to  old  age  in  a  period  of 
happy  progress,  and  to  be  able  to  bear  testimony  to  the 
advances  which  have  been  made  in  the  cause  of  civil 
and  religious  liberty  during  the  half  century  which  has 
elapsed  since  1824  to  the  present  year.  At  the  former 
of  these  periods,  it  was  laid  down  as  an  axiom,  which 
no  one  could  venture  to  contradict,  that  changes  intro- 
duced by  Sovereigns  from  above  would  be  productive 
of  peace  and  improvement,  but  that  if  introduced  from 
below,  by  the  initiative  of  popular  movements,  they 
could  produce  nothing  but  anarchy  and  confusion. 

In  1874,  we  see  institutions  introduced  in  Germany 
by  universal  suffrage,  planted  in  Italy  by  popular  revo- 
lution, resting  in  France,  as  in  Germany,  upon  univer- 
sal suffrage. 

Generally  speaking,  the  authority  of  governments 
in  Europe  is  based  upon  those  principles  which  in  1824 
were  pronounced  to  be  the  parents  of  anarchy  and  dis- 
order. No  one  can  say  that,  with  the  exception  of 
England,  the  Powers  of  Europe  have  yet  attained  a 
settled  condition ;  but  there  are  many  signs  which  give 
hope  of  the  prevalence  of  religious  liberty.  In  the 
course  of  this  retrospect,  it  is  impossible  not  to  recollect 
that  the  Madiai  were  severely  punished  for  reading  in 
a  family  circle  some  chapters  of  the  Holy  Gospel,  and 
that  in  Spain  some  few  scattered  Protestants  were  pun- 
ished for  a  similar  profanation. 

We   hear  now  of  Protestant  places  of  worship  at 


374  RECOLLECTIONS  AND   SUGGESTIONS. 

Cordova  and  Seville,  in.  Spain,  and  at  Florence  and 
Rome,  in  Italy. 

When  the  great  truths  of  the  Gospel  are  thus  ad- 
mitted and  allowed  to  reach  the  public  ear,  we  may 
have  good  hopes  for  the  cause  of  civil  ahd  religious 
liberty.  With  this  sentiment  I  conclude  my  work. 
John  Milton  has  said:  — 

What  more  oft  in  nations  grown  corrupt, 
And  by  their  vices  brought  to  servitude, 
Than  to  love  bondage  more  than  liberty, 
Bondage  with  ease  than  strenuous  liberty. 

Such  is  happily  not  now  our  case.  From  1815  to  1873 
there  has  been  a  course  of  gradual  progress  towards 
civil  and  religious  liberty.  There  is  nothing  so  con- 
servative as  Progress.  England  is  in  the  full  enjoyment 
of  civil  and  religious  freedom.  I  hope  she  may  never 
descend  from  this  height,  and  that  the  wish  of  the  great 
poet,  under  whose  roof  I  conclude,  may  see  his  vision 
fulfilled,  and  become  the  creed  and  the  confidence  of  a 
better  and  a  stronger  age  of  mankind :  — 

Of  old  sat  Freedom  on  the  heights, 
The  thunders  breaking  at  her  feet ; 

Above  her  shook  the  starry  lights, 
She  heard  the  torrents  meet. 

There  in  her  place  she  did  rejoice, 

Self-gather'd  in  her  prophet-mind. 
But  fragments  of  hor  mighty  voice 
Came  rolling  on  the  wind. 

Then  stept  she  down  thro'  town  and  field. 

To  mingle  with  the  Imman  race, 
And  part  by  part  to  men  revealed 

The  fulness  of  her  face. 

Russell. 
Ald WORTH,  October  29,  1874. 


APPENDICES. 


IiS"  the  progress  of  liberal  opinions,  it  is  important  to  record 
the  relaxation  of  the  chains  by  which  the  Church  of  England 
has  been  bound.  The  Low  Church  endeavor  to  confine  the 
Established  Church  within  the  strict  letter  of  its  Calvinistic 
Articles  ;  the  High  Church,  especially  the  Ritualistic  portion 
of  the  body,  wish  to  condemn  all  who  do  not  follow  with 
servile  obedience  the  syllogisms  of  Aristotle  and  the  abuses 
of  the  Roman  Church;  the  Broad  Church,  alone,  wish  to 
give  that  full  liberty  to  the  Church  of  England  which  the 
late  Bishop  Wilberforce  delighted  to  boast  of  and  to  cel- 
ebrate. 

One  of  the  first  cases  which,  after  Lord  Brougham's  Act 
of  Parliament,  came  before  the  Ecclesiastical  Committee  of 
Privy  Council  was  the  case  of  Mr.  Gorham.  Mr.  Gorham 
had  been  appointed  to  a  living  in  Cornwall.  In  looking  over 
the  new  scene  of  his  labors,  he  found  in  a  corner  of  his 
church  a  square  stone  altar  which  had  been  used  before  the 
Reformation.  He  moved  the  altar  back  from  its  corner  and 
replaced  it  by  a  communion  table  suitable  to  the  reformed 
Church.  But  his  ofience  was  not  overlooked  by  the  High 
Church  party.  On  his  being  appointed  to  another  living  in 
Devonshire,  the  Bishop  of  Exeter  summoned  him  to  appear 
before  him  to  answer  for  a  heresy,  into  which  he  was  said  to 
have  fallen,  in  the  subject  of  baptism.  Mr.  Gorham,  who 
was  poor  and  in  weak  health,  was  compelled  to  walk  between 
four  and  five  miles  each  day,  and  was  kept  fasting  while  he 


376  APPENDIX  I. 

was  exposed  to.  the  dialectics,  divinity,  and  metaphysics  of 
his  inexorable  enemies.  They  found,  of  course,  that  he  was 
unable  to  hold  the  living  to  which  he  had  been  appointed. 
But  happily  for  Mr.  Gorhara,  the  case  came  before  the  Judi- 
cial Committee,  the  members  present  of  which  were  Lord 
Larydale,  Lord  Campbell,  Sir  James  Parke,  Dr.  Lushington, 
Sir  J.  L.  Knight  Bruce,  and  Mr.  Pemberton  Leigh.  The 
Archbishops  of  Canterbury  (Sumner),  and  York  (Musgrave), 
and  the  Bishop  of  London  (Blomfield),  assisted  by  special 
command  of  Her  Majesty. 

On  the  8th  of  March,  1850,  the  judgment  of  the  Judicial 
Committee  was  read  in  the  Council  Chamber  by  Lord  Lary- 
dale. The  Lords  of  the  Council  did  not  decide  that  the 
opinions  of  Mr.  Gorham  were  the  opinions  of  the  Church  of 
England,  but  they  declared  '  that  it  appears  that  opinions, 
which  we  cannot  in  any  important  particular  distinguish 
from  those  entertained  by  Mr.  Gorham,  have  been  pro- 
pounded and  maintained  without  censure  or  reproach  by 
many  eminent  and  illustrious  prelates  and  divines,  who  have 
adorned  the  Church  from  the  time  when  the  Articles  were 
first  established.  We  do  not  altirm  that  the  doctrines  and 
opinions  of  Jewell,  Hooker,  Usher,  Jeremy  Taylor,  Whitgift, 
Pearson,  Carlton,  Prideaux,  and  many  others,  can  be  received 
as  evidence  of  the  doctrines  of  the  Church  of  England ;  but 
their  conduct,  unblamed  and  unquestioned  as  it  was,  proves, 
at  least,  the  liberty  which  has  been  allowed  of  maintaining 
such  doctrine.* 

On  the  9th  of  March,  1850,  the  Privy  Council  was  held,  at 
which  were  present  Her  Majesty  the  Queen,  Prince  Albert, 
the  Lord  President,  Lord  John  Russell,  Viscount  Palmerston, 
and  Sir  George  Grey.  The  Queen,  having  taken  the  judg- 
ment of  the  Committee  of  the  Privy  Council  into  considera- 
tion, *  was  pleased  to  approve  thereof,  and  of  what  is  tlierein 
recommended,  and  to  order,  as  it  is  hereby  ordered,  that  the 
same  be  duly  and  punctually  observed,  complied  with,  and 
carried  into  execution.' 


APPENDIX  11.  877 

The  committee  say  in  their  judgment :  '  The  case  not  re- 
quiring it,  we  have  abstained  from  expressing  any  opinion 
of  our  own  upon  the  theological  correctness  or  error  of  the 
doctrine  held  by  Mr.  Gorham,  which  was  discussed  before  us 
at  such  great  length  and  with  so  much  learning.'  This  judg- 
ment was  a  great  enlargement  of  the  liberty  of  the  Church 
of  England,  and  influenced  many  other  cases.  I  proceed  to 
one  of  these  upon  a  matter  of  very  great  importance. 


II. 

In"  1864,  the  judgment  of  the  Judicial  Committee  of  Privy 
Council  was  delivered  upon  a  case  affecting  the  opinions  of 
two  of  the  authors  of  the  work  entitled  '  Essays  and  Reviews.' 

It  is  well  known  that  the  authors  of  these  Essays  declared 
publicly,  that  they  were  not  collectively  responsible  for  any 
one  of  the  Essays  contained  in  their  work.  But  the  point 
of  the  judgment  pronounced  by  Lord  Westbury,  in  1864,  is 
still  of  very  great  importance,  and  affected  very  seriously  the 
position  and  reputation  of  two  of  the  authors,  namely,  Dr. 
Williams,  Vicar  of  Broad-Chalke,  in  Wiltshire,  and  Henry 
Bristow  Wilson,  B.D.,  Vicar  of  Great  Staughton,  Hunts. 

The  points  on  which  they  were  arraigned  are  so  clearly 
defined  in  an  opinion  signed  by  Sir  Roundel  Palmer,  now 
Lord  Selborne,  and  Sir  Hugh  Cairns,  now  Lord  Cairns,  that 
I  think  I  can  do  nothing  better  than  copy  the  opinions 
signed  by  them:  — 

'  We  understand  the  Lord  Chancellor  to  have,  in  substance, 
founded  his  judgments  upon  a  negative  answer  to  the  in- 
quiry, whether  every  clergyman  of  the  Church  of  England 
was  strictly  bound  to  affirm  the  two  following  propositions : 

< "  1.  That  every  part  of  every  book  of  Holy  Scripture  was 
written  under  the  inspiration  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  is  the 
Word  of  God." 


(Signed) 


378  APPENDIX  II. 

* "  2.  That  it  is  impious  or  heretical  to  entertain  or  express 
a  hope  that  even  the  ultimate  pardon  of  the  wicked,  who 
are  condemned  in  the  day  of  judgment,  may  be  consistent 
with  the  will  of  Almighty  God.'* 

'  These  are  the  exact  propositions  referred  to  in  our 
opinion. 

Roundel  Palmer 
(now  Lord  Selbome). 
II.  M.  Cairns 
(now  Lord  Cairns).' 

The  members  of  the  Judicial  Committee  present  at  these 
appeals  were  —  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  (Longley), 
the  Lord  Chancellor  (Westbury),  the  Archbishop  of  York 
(Thompson),  the  Bishop  of  London  (Tait),  now  Archbishop 
of  Canterbury,  Lord  Cranworth,  Lord  Chelmsford,  Lord 
Kingsdown.  Two  of  these,  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury 
and  the  Archbishop  of  York,  stated  '  that  they  do  not  concur 
in  those  parts  of  this  judgment  which  relate  to  tlie  7th  arti- 
cle of  charge  against  Dr.  Williams,  and  to  the  8th  article  of 
charge  against  Mr.  Wilson.'  All  the  others,  namely,  the 
Lord  Chancellor  (Westbury),  the  Bishop  of  London  (Tait), 
Lord  Cranworth,  Lord  Chelmsford,  and  Lord  Kingsdown, 
must  be  reckoned  as  having  concurred  in  the  judgjnent. 

I  have  quoted  these  opinions  of  Mr.  Gorham  in  regard  to 
baptism,  and  of  Dr.  Williams  and  of  Mr.  Bristow  Wilson, 
without  any  thought  of  espousing  the  opinions  either  of  Mr. 
Gorham  in  respect  of  baptism,  Dr.  Williams  or  Mr.  Wilson  in 
regard  to  the  doctrine  of  eternal  punishment.  I  have  quoted 
them  in  order  to  show  the  liberty  of  opinion  which  is  allowed 
by  the  judgments  of  the  Committee  of  Privy  Council  to  mem- 
bers of  the  Church  who  have  endeavored  to  seek  the  truth, 
and  have  honestly  exercised  the  right  of  private  judgment 
which  is  exercised  by  all  true  Protestants. 

An  attempt  was  made  in  the  House  of  Commons  by  some 
ritualistic  members  of  Parliament  to  deprive  the  judgments 
of  the  Privy  Council  of  ecclesiastical  authority.    By  a  very 


APPENDIX  II.  379 

cunning  artifice,  it  was  proposed  that  a  committee  of  Privy- 
Council  in  ecclesiastical  cases  should  consist  entirely  of  lay- 
men ;  this  motion  was  carried  unopposed,  and  almost  unper- 
ceived,  in  a  committee  on  the  'Bill  of  Judicature/  It  is 
obvious  what  would  have  been  the  next  step.  It  would  have 
been  contended  that  a  judgment  of  laymen  could  have  no 
weight  with  the  bishops  and  archbishops,  deans,  rectors,  and 
vicars,  who  had  been  admitted  to  ordination  as  priests. 
There  is  no  saying  how  far  this  argument  might  have  pre- 
vailed in  producing  schism  in  the  Church,  and  confusion  in 
the  Law.  Happily  the  trick  was  detected.  Lord  Cairns 
perceived  that  it  was  a  stratagem  w^ith  the  Ritualists,  and 
must  be  opposed  in  the  House  of  Lords.  Lord  Selborne, 
then  Lord  Chancellor,  proposed  an  amendment  by  which  the 
poison  of  the  amendment  of  the  Commons  was  neutralized 
and  rendered  harmless.  When  I  went  to  the  House  of  Lords, 
I  found  that  the  Archbishops  of  Canterbury  and  of  York  had 
consented  to  the  amendment  of  the  Lord  Chancellor,  and 
that  the  subtle  device  of  the  Ritualists  was  sure  to  fail. 

I  rely  upon  the  legal  knowledge  and  the  freedom  from 
prejudice  of  Lord  Selborne  and  Lord  Cairns  to  defeat  any 
similar  artifice.  It  is  clear  that  the  Ritualists  are  not  dis- 
posed to  give  up  the  contest.  Dr.  Pusey  has  publicly  declared 
that  the  judgment  in  the  case  of  Mr.  Gorham  was  an  error 
and  ought  to  be  reversed.  Until  the  religion  of  the  Church 
of  England  has  been  assimilated  to  the  religion  of  Rome,  of 
St.  Thomas  Aquinas  and  of  Aristotle,  the  Ritualists  will  not 
be  satisfied. 

It  remains  to  be  seen  what  part  Mr.  Gladstone  will  take 
in  this  great  contest.  The  principles  of  the  Reformation  are 
on  one  side,  the  adherents  of  the  Church  of  Rome  on  the 
other. 


INDEX. 


A. 

Abercrombie,  James,  election  of,  268. 

Aberdeen,  Lord,  course  suggested  with 
regard  to  Ecclesiastical  Titles  Act, 
211 ;  his  Ministry,  221. 

Adams,_  Mr.,  his  conduct  with  regard 
to  the  'Alabama'  claims,  228. 

'  Alabama '  claims,  Earl  Russell  on 
the,  228;  Mr.  Fish's  proposition, 
326. 

Althorp,  Lord,  as  Chancellor  of  the 
Exchequer,  56;  speech  on  the  res- 
ignation of  ministers,  84  ;  restora- 
tion of  his  Mmistrv,  83  ;  introduces 
the  Coercion  Bill, '92  ;  and  Bill  for 
the  Reform  of  the  Church  of  Ire- 
land, 93  ;  Bill  for  Reform  of  Poor- 
laws,  95  ;  speech  on  the  Irish  Church 
question,  lUO ;  opposes  the  Coercion 
Act.  104;  resignation,  104  ;  restored 
to  power  under  Lord  Melbourne, 
106;  resignation  and  retirement  from 
public  life,  106;  attempts  to  promote 
free  trade,  167;  influence  in  the 
House  of  Commons,  215;  on  the 
Uniim  Act,  231;  waits  upon  Sir  R. 
Peel,  238;  grants  incurred  by  the 
abolition  of  slavery,  348. 

America,  opinions  on  the  Treaty  of 
Washington,  323  ;  points  in  support 
of  these  opinions,  325;  our  land 
frontier  in,  3Q1. 

American  Civil  War,  a  calamitous 
event,  235 ;  neutrality  of  England, 
235. 

Anne,  Queen,  Parliament  during  the 
reign  of,  217. 

Australia,  166. 

Austria,  intent'ons  of  Russia  towards, 
337  ;  aggresion  of,  364. 

Azeglio,  Alarquis  de,  letter  to,  234. 


B. 


Baldwin,  Mr.,  discussion  on  respon- 
sible government  in  the  colonies, 
165. 

Baptism,  Mr.  Gorham's  opinions  on, 
376. 

Baring,  Mr.  Alexander,  his  objections 
to  reform,  33 ;  deputed  by  the  Duke 
of  Wellington  to  form  a  government, 
84;  opposition  to  the  Keform  Bill, 
85;  fails  to  form  a  government,  87. 

Bedford,  Duke  of;  306 

Belfast,  illegal  meeting  at,  288. 

Bible,  the,  in  national  schools,  294; 
evidence  against  Ritualism,  353;  use 
of,  355. 

Bills,  private,  in  Parliament,  289. 

Births,  registration  of,  117. 

Bissett,  Mr.,  on  Lord  Wellington  be- 
fore the  battle  of  Salamanca,  11. 

Black  Sea  Treaty,  366. 

Blomfield,  Dr.,  treaty  regarding  edu- 
cation, 308. 

Bonaparte,  Emperor  Napoleon,  his 
downfall,  335 ;  his  character,  369. 

Bonaparte,  Louis  Napoleon,  his  quar- 
rel with  Germanv,  336  ;  and  results, 
336 ;  his  character,  363. 

Boroughs,  origin  of  nomination,  29. 

Boundary  Bill,  adoption  of  the,  74. 

Bright,  Right  Hon.  John,  his  interest 
in  the  Irish  Church,  126. 

Britain,  Great,  its  constitution,  176, 177; 
advantages  of  government  forms  of, 
176 ;  her  honor  tarnished  by  the 
Treaty  of  Washington,  366. 

British  and  Foreign  School  Society, 
foundation  of,  306;  grants  to,  309. 

British  Isles,  their  security  from  inva- 
sion, 361;  exposed  to  dangers,  362, 
363. 


382 


INDEX. 


Brougham,  Lord,  his  reputation  as  an 
orator,  4G  ;  accepts  the  otter  of  the 
Great  Seal,  55;  speech  on  the  Re- 
form Bill,  65-(i8;  his  qualities,  111, 
112;  deprived  of  the  (jrcat  Seal, 
113  ;  Lord  Melbourne's  objections, 
to,  113;  proposes  a  grant  for  edu- 
cational societies,  30^  ;  attention  de- 
voted to  endowments,  359. 

Bruce,  Mr.,  appointed  Home  Secretary, 
242. 

Brunswick,  Duke  of,  1,  2. 

Burdett,  Sir  Francis,  his  proposal  of 
parliamentary  reform,  30;  meeting 
at  his  house,  298. 

Burke,  Edmund,  on  monopoly  of  trade 
to  Kngland,  274;  on  commerce  of 
Ireland,  275;  Goldsmith  on,  275; 
on  Lord  Chatham,  281. 

Byron,  Lord,  lines  on  the  Tories,  346. 


c. 


Cairns,  Lord,  his  opinions  on  Dr.  Wil- 
liams's and  Mr.  Wilson's  case,  377  ; 
opposition  to  the  Bill  of  Judicature, 
379 

Campbell,  Lord,  as  Lord  Chancellor, 
235. 

Canning,  Mr.,  an  opponent  of  parlia- 
mentary reform,  23;  on  the  heads  of 
the  Government,  32;  and  on  Earl 
Kussell's  speech  on  iteform,  37, 
38;  succeeds  Lord  Castlereagh,  39; 
objections  against  being  appointed 
I'rime  Minister,  42;  made  Prime 
Minister,  43;  resignation  of  his  col- 
leagues, 43;  his  conduct  of  affairs, 
43;  his  reputation  as  an  orator,  45  ; 
his  death,  47. 

Card  well,  Mr.,  appointed  Secretary  of 
War,  241. 

Castlereagh,  Lord,  his  power  before 
and  atter  the  battle  of  Waterloo,  IG  ; 
his  opin'ons  and  abilities,  21;  as  an 
orai{)r,  21;  his  character,  22;  de- 
cisiuUM  on  (iiiestions  of  social  prog- 
ress, 23;  death,  39;  intluencc  ni 
the  House  of  Coninions,  215. 

Cuve  of  Adiillam,  dcscnplion  of  the, 
237;  opposition  to  tlu;  Ministry,  237. 

Cavendish,  Lord  IVederick,  his  scheme 
of  religious  education,  320. 

Chamberlain,  Mr.,  deprived  of  his  scat 
in  Parliament,  344;  description  of, 
344. 

Chamberlain  of  London  v.  Allen  Evans, 
31G. 

*  Chapter  of  Irish  Landlordism,'  ex- 
tract from,  252. 


Chartist  riots,  206 ;  suppression  of  the, 
208,  348. 

Christianity,  teaching  of,  140. 

Church  in  England,  state  of  the,  352; 
one  of  two  things  to  be  a<lopted  with 
regard  to  the,  355;  relaxation  of  the 
chains,  375;  case  of  Mr.  Gorham, 
375;  judgment,  37G ;  case  of  Dr. 
Williams  and  Mr.  Wilson,  377. 

Church  property,  disposal  of,  141. 

Clare,  Lord,  in  the  Hou.se  of  Lords, 
304. 

Clarendon,  Lord,  his  proposal  in  refer- 
ence to  the  Turkish  Government, 
222;  as  Secretary  for  Foreign  Af- 
tiairs,  242;  on  Oliver  Cromwell's 
scheme  of  representation,  3.58. 

Cobden,  Mr.,  on  the  United  States, 
3G2. 

Cockbum,  Lord  Chief  Justice,  on  the 
'Alabama'  claims,  332. 

Coercion  Bill,  Ireland,  92. 

Colonial  affairs.  Earl  liussell's  interest 
in,  1G2  ;  his  policy,  1G3. 

Colonies,  prop<Jsition  regarding  pro- 
tection of  the,  1G3;  discussion  on 
responsible  government  in  tlie,  165; 
position  of  Britain  with  regard  to 
the,  1G5,  166. 

Commons,  House  of,  debate  on  the 
Catholic  question,  23;  slave  trade, 
24;  conduct  of  Lord  Sidmouth.  24; 
suspension  of  the  Habeas  Corpus 
Act,  24;  Wliig  opposition,  25;  linnn- 
cial  economy,  27 ;  propo.sal  of  parii  i- 
meutary  reform,  28;  dissatisiactioa 
at  the  representation  of,  28;  motions 
and  division  on  the  Koman  Cath- 
olic question,  40;  a|ipointmcnt  of 
Mr.  (,'anning  as  Prime  Minister,  42; 
separation  of  the  Tory  party  under 
Canning,  45;  oratory  in  the  House, 
45;  Mr.  Peel  as  leader,  47;  repeal 
of  the  Corporation  and  Test  .Vets 
carried,  48;  the  Koman  Catholic 
Helief  Bill,  48,  49;  rupture  of  the 
Tory  party,  49;  fall  of  the  Tory 
Ministry,  51 ;  poor-laws,  52-54;  .Min- 
istry of  Lord  (Jrey,  55;  formation 
of  committee  <'n  parliamentary  re- 
f 'rm,  56  ;  effects  of  the  introduction 
of  the  Keform  Uill  on  the  House, 
58,  69;  second  reading  of  the  He- 
f(nm  Bill,  6t);  dissolution  of  Par- 
liament, IS'M,  (51;  great  exeitement 
in  the  House,  G2,  63  ;  result  of  gen- 
eral election,  63.  deltate  on  l^etonn 
IVill,  64;  adoption  of  the  Houndary 
Bill,  74;  third  reading  of  the  he- 
form  Bill,  75;  final  passing  of  the 

1      Keform  Bill,  1832,  70;  auieudmcut 


INDEX. 


383 


to  the  Reform  Bill,  79-82 ;  resigna- 
tion of  Lord  Grey's  Ministry,  83; 
Duke  of  Wellington  offers  to  form 
a  government,  83;  motion  on  the 
Reform  Bill,  84,  85;  debate  on  the 
Reform  Bill,  86;  Duke  of  Welling- 
ton fails  to  form  a  government,  88; 
debate  on  the  Coercion  Bill,  Lord 
Stanley's  speech,  92;  Bill  for  the 
Reform  of  the  Church  of  Ireland, 
93 ;  Irish  Church  Temporalities  Bill 
and  the  Colonial  Slavery  Abolition 
Bill,  94;  opening  of  Parliament,  1834, 
94;  the  King's  speech,  94;  reform 
of  the  poor-laws,  95,  96 ;  Poor-law 
Bill  introduced  by  Lord  Althorp, 
96;  Irish  Church  question,  97;  Earl 
Russell's  speech  on  the  Irish  Church 
question,  97,  98;  motion  upon  the 
Irish  Church  question,  99;  Lord 
Althorp's  speech,  100;  resignation 
of  four  Cabinet  MinivSters,  101;  and 
explanation  of  by  the  Earl  of  Ripon, 
101 ;  resignation  of  Lord  Grey,  102 ; 
cause  of  his  resignation,  103 ;  Lord 
Melbourne's  administration,  105; 
Lord  Althorp  leader  under  Lord 
Melbourne,  106 ;  resignation  of  Lord 
Althorp,  106 ;  offer  of  leadership  to 
Earl  Russell,  107;  dismissal  of  the 
Ministry,  107;  confidence  in  Lord 
Melbourne's  Government,  108;  elec- 
tion of  Speaker,  109 ;  Sir  Robert 
Peel,  minister,  109 ;  difficulties  of 
Sir  Robert  Peel,  109,  110  ;  return  of 
Lord  Melbourne  to  power.  111 ;  res- 
olution on  Irish  Church,  111;  Lord 
Melbourne's  Ministry,  115  ;  commu- 
tation of  tithes,  116;  speeches  on 
the  Marriiige  Bill,  119-121;  educa- 
tion, 122 ;  the  Appropriation  Clause, 
125 ;  Encumbered  Estates  Act,  159 ; 
introduced  by  Sir  John  Romilly,  160; 
course  pursued  with  regard  to  free 
trade,  168 ;  Earl  Russell's  motion  de- 
feated, 169;  dissolution  of  Parlia- 
ment, 170;  inauguration  of  New 
Ministry  under  Sir  R.  Peel,  171; 
repeal  of  the  corn-laws,  171 ;  suc- 
cess of  Sir  U.  Peel's  administration, 
172;  difficulty  with  Ireland,  172; 
Sir  R.  Peel's' measures  lor  the  en- 
dowment of  Maynooth  College,  173; 
repeal  of  Navigation  Act,  175;  ad- 
vantages of  British  lorm  of  govern- 
ment, 17G ;  election  of  constituents, 
177;  financial  periods,  177;  danger 
in  the  Eastern  question,  184 ;  death 
of  William  IV".  and  accessio.i  of 
Queen  Victoria,  183;  sugar  duties, 
190;  system  of  protection,  191;  corn 


duties,  191 ;  defeat  of  Whig  Ministry, 
191;   Sir  R.  Peel's   Ministry,    193; 
Tory  policy,  194;  Pitt's  policy,  194; 
changes  of  Tory  policy,  196;  want 
of  confidence  in  Tory  .Ministrv,  197  ; 
Protection  of  Life  Bill,  198;  defeat  of 
bir  R.  Peel's  Ministry,  198;  admin- 
istration of  Lord  Russell,  198;   divi- 
sion on  the  sugar  duty,  199 ;  progress 
of    free    trade,    200;    Philosophical 
Radicals'  motion,  205;   debate  and 
division,    206;   Chartist   riots,    206; 
meeting  of  Cabinet,  297;  Ecclesias- 
tical  iithes  Act,  210;  Lord  Russell 
resigns  office,  211;  Mr.  Tierney  on 
office,  211;  leaders,  214;   parlia.nen- 
tary  government,  215 ;  conduct  in  the 
Walcheren   expedition,  216;  in  the 
time  of  Addington,  216;  and  Queen 
Anne's  reign,  Zl8;  Robert  Walpole, 
Pitt,   and  Fox  as  leaders,  218,  219; 
Lord  Aberdeen's  Ministry,  221;  al- 
tercations   on    the    Crimean    War, 
222;   foreign  policy,    226;    neutral- 
ity  in  American   Civil    War,   235 ; 
Lord  Rus=ell  as  First  Lord  of  the 
Treasury,  236 ;  the  Cave  of  Adullam, 
237  ;  Reform  Bill  of  1867,  239;  gen- 
eral election  and  defeat  of  Ministry, 
241;  Mr.    Gladstone   forms  a   Min- 
istry',  241 ;    courses  pursued  as  to 
Irish  Church   question,  259;   repre- 
sentation  in  Scotland,  267  ;   affairs 
in   Ireland,  277;   Roman  Catholics 
of  Ireland,   278;  Pitt's  plan  of  coa- 
lition,   280;    George    IIl.'s    policy, 
282;    resignation   of  Ministry,   282; 
Irish  Church  question,  285;   policy 
after  the   union  with  Ireland,  288; 
Home  Rule,  289 ;  private  bills,  289 ; 
national  education  in  Ireland,  294; 
Landlords  and  Tenants'  Law,  299 ; 
national  education,  305 ;  plan  of  re- 
ligious instruction,  307;  compromise- 
with  the  Bishops  on  national  edu- 
cation,   309;    giants  to  educational 
societies,    310;    Education    Act  of 
1870,  310;  compulsory  church-rates 
abolished,  313  ;  schemes  for  religious 
education,  320;  Treat}' of  Washing- 
ton, 323;  foreign  policy,  335;  sug- 
gestions on  luture  policy,  337;  gen- 
eral  election,  339 ;  defeat  of  Whig 
Ministry,   339;    Sacheverell  clause, 
340;  the  Irish  Church  Bill,  341 ;  Land 
Act,   341;   Education  Act  of   1870, 
342  ;  abolition  of  slavery,  348;  ques- 
tions which  deserve  to  be  noted  in 
approaching  sessions,  357  ;  represen- 
tation in  the  time  of  Oliver  Crom- 
well, 357 ;  topics  to  which  atteutioa 


384 


INDEX. 


must  be  directed,  359 ;  public  opin- 
ion, 3G0;  security  from  foreign  inva- 
sion, 3G1;  Bill  of  Judicature,  carried, 
379. 

Compulsory  Church-rates,  Act  for  the 
abolition  of,  313. 

Continent  of  Europe,  state  of  affairs 
on  the,  17,  206. 

Corn  duties,  I'Jl. 

Corn-laws,  repeal  of  the,  171. 

Cornwallis,  Lord,  and  the  Irish  Union, 
278. 

Corporation  and  Test  Acts,  repeal  of 
the,  48. 

Cottenham.  Lord,  introduces  Encum- 
bered Estates  Act,  159;  on  8ir  R. 
I'ecl,  197. 

Coulson,  Mr.  Walter,  frames  Encum- 
bered Estates  Act,  159,  IGO. 

Crimean  War,  its  origin,  222. 

Croker,  Mr.,  a  formidable  opponent  of 
the  Reform  Bill,  76. 

Cromwell,  Oliver,  government  of,  357 ; 
his  system  of  representation,  357; 
his  project  suggested  as  a  model  of 
reform,  372. 


D. 


Denominational  schools,  319. 

Derby,  Lord,  news  of  his  death,  182; 
his  Reform  Bill  of  1807,  239. 

'  Directorium  Anglicanum,'  350. 

Disestablishment  and  disendowment 
of  churches,  suggestions  regarding, 
359. 

Disraeli,  Right  Hon.  B.,  and  Tory 
party,  196;  as  First  Lord  of  the 
Treasury,  239;  his  ideas  of  Reform, 
239;  resignation,  241. 

Dissenters,  312,  313;  position  of,  310; 
denominational  fees,  318;  views  on 
the  subject  of  religion,  320;  griev- 
ances, 322;  behavior  of  Mr.  Forster 
towards,  343. 

Drumniond,  Mr.  Ileniy,  321. 

Dungannon  (Convention,  and  resolu- 
tions at,  277. 

Durham,  Lord,  his  suggestions  on  the 
disfranciiiscment  ot  seats  in  Parlia- 
ment,  74. 


Eastern  question,  the,  183;  Lord 
Palmcrston's  policy,  183;  state  of 
afl'airs  in  the  East,  185. 

Ebriiigton,  Lord,  his  motion  upon  the 
Reform  Bill,  86. 


Ecclesiastical  Committee  of  Privy  Coun- 
cil, Mr.  Gorhams  case  belbre  the, 
375. 

Education,  Earl  Russell's  scheme,  123; 
inspection  in  the  schools  of  the 
National  Society,  123;  Duke  of  New- 
castle on,  124;  suggestions  on,  125; 
object  and  fundamental  principle  in 
Ireland,  134 ;  rules  for  religious  and 
secular  instruction,  134-136;  rules 
of  the  Irish  Board,  136 ;  wages  of 
teachers,  137 ;  system  introduced  in 
Ireland  in  1831,  1G8;  principle  of 
the  National  School  sy&tcm  of  Ire- 
land, 139;  Christian  teaching,  140; 
report  in  Ireland,  142;  Archbishop 
Whately  on  education  in  Ireland, 
294;  inquiry  into  English  Universi- 
ties, .305;  Universities  of  Oxford 
and  Cambridge,  305;  foundation  of 
the  British  and  Foreign  School  So- 
ciety, 306;  and  National  Society, 
306;  want  of  education  in  England, 
307;  division  on,  in  House  of  Com- 
mons, 308  ;  resolutions  in  House  of 
Lords,  303;  compromise  with  Bish»- 
ops,  309;  grants  to  the  National  and 
British  and  Foreign  Societies,  309; 
Act  of  1870,  310,  342;  opinions  and 
suggestions  on  the  Act  of  1670, 
811;  board  schools,  311;  voluntary 
schools,  311;  proposed  plan  in  Eng- 
land and  Wales,  314;  principles  of 
plan,  315;  position  of  Dissenters,  316; 
M'ggestions  as  to  Church  schools, 
319. 

Egerton,  Sir  Francis,  on  Roman  Catho- 
lic question,  40. 

Election,  general,  in  1841,  192;  in 
1868,  241;  in  1807,  283;  in  1874, 
339;  in  1841,  340. 

EUenborough,  Lord,  his  scheme  of  the 
Rclbrm  Bill,  82. 

Encumbered  Estates  Act,  159;  intro- 
duced by  Sir  John  Romilly,  160. 

England,  finanoiul  .state  of,  15;  state  in 
1833,  91 ;  '  Times  *  concsnondent  on 
the  state  of,  143;  Count  Metternich 
on  the  state  of,  206;  st.ite  of  affairs 
in,  in  1856,  223;  ncutralitv  in  Amer- 
ican Civil  War.  235;  IVIr.  (Jrotc'a 
opinion,  236;  comi)ari!<on  between 
miinlcr  in  Ireland  and,  254;  conduct 
towards  Ireland,  288  ;  position 
towards  Franci",  337;  *uggcsiions  as 
to  policy  towards  Genuuny,  337; 
state  of  the  Church  in,  352:  one  of 
two  things  to  be  adopted  with  reganl 
to  the  Chureh,  355;  parlianiontary 
representation  in,  in  the  time  of 
Oliver  Crumwull,  357;    treaty  with 


INDEX. 


385 


Paris,  1856,  3G6;  religious  liberty 
in,  373. 

England,  Church  of,  375 ;  case  of  Mr. 
Gorham,  375;  and  judgracnt,  376; 
case  of  IMr.  Wilson  and  Dr.  Wil- 
liams, 377. 

'  English  in  Ireland,'  bv  James  Anthony 
Froude,  sketch  of,  302, 

'Essays  and  Reviews,'  case  of  the  au- 
thors of,  377. 

Europe,  peace  of,  14;  sketch  by  Pitt 
of  a  restored,  17;  supposed  preten- 
sions of  the  sovereigns  of,  337; 
changes  from  Charles  V.  and  Louis 
XI.  to  present  time,  372,  373;  au- 
thority of  governments,  373. 

Exchequer,  receipts  of  the,  in  1857, 
175. 

Exeter,  Bishop  of,  his  objections  to  the 
Marriage  Bill,  120, 121. 


FiXANCiAL  economy,  suggestions  on, 
27. 

Financial  system  in  England,  15. 

Fish,  Mr.,  on  the  concessions  of  the 
United  States,  326. 

Fitzgerald,  Sir  Edward,  304. 

Fitzgibbon,  Mr.  Gerald,  his  pamphlet 
about  Land  question,  153,  154. 

Eitzwilliam,  Lord,  304. 

Fletcher,  Air.,  his  character,  269. 

Fletcher,  Mrs.,  anecdote  of,  267;  ex- 
tract from  her  diary,  268 ;  character, 
269. 

Foreign  affairs,  state  of,  in  1856,  222; 
present  state  of,  224. 

Foreign  policy,  14,  335;  from  1860 
to  1865,  226 ;  suggestions  on  future, 
337. 

Forster,  Mr.,  his  errors  regarding  the 
Education  Act  of  1870,  343. 

Fox,  Charles  James,  his  conduct  tow- 
ards the  French  Government,  4;  in 
favor  of  parliamentary  reform,  30; 
his  character,  219;  in  Pitt's  Ministry, 
281;  differences  with  Pitt,  281; 
death,  282. 

Fox,  Henry,  219. 

France,  state  of  affairs  in,  1,  2;  policy, 
293 ;  marriage  and  education  in,  293 ; 
state  of,  on  the  downfall  of  the  P^m- 
peror  Napoleon  Bonaparte,  335 ;  her 
quarrel  with  Germany,  336  ;  and 
results,  336;  suggestions  of  policy 
towards,  338;  state  of  its  constitution, 
367;  Whigs  of,  368;  Duke  of  Orleans 
made  king  of,  368 ;  present  state  of, 
36 J;    form  of  government    recom- 


mended by  M.  Thiers,  3G9;  improba- 
bilities ot  a  Bonapartist  restoration, 
371. 

Free  trade,  course  pursued  by  the  Cab- 
inet in  1840,  168;  measures  proposed 
by  Mr.  Huskisson,  168;  and  their 
results,  168;  duties  on  corn,  191; 
explanation  by  Whig  Ministry,  192; 
Sir  Robert  Peel's  conduct  with  re- 
gard to,  193;  Pitt  approves  of,  194; 
supported  by  Sir  James  Graham, 
200;  promoted  by  Sir  Robert  Peel, 
200;  its  progress,  200 ;  and  triumph, 
202;  support  of  the  Liberal  ToriLS, 
202. 

Froude,  Mr.,  on  Ireland,  257;  on 
smuggling  in  Ireland,  272;  'English 
in  Ireland,'  sketch  of,  302. 


G. 


George  IIL,  bis  personal  dislikes.  48; 
letter  to  Mr.  Pitt,  279 ;  on  (he  death 
of  Fox,  282;  consequences  of  his 
policy,  282 

George  IV.,  his  personal  dislikes,  48. 

Gladstone,  Right  Hon.  W.  E.,  speech 
on  the  Irish  Church  question,  241; 
forms  a  Ministry,  241 ;  opinions  on 
the  Protestant  Church  of  Ireland, 
284;  his  qualities,  242,  285;  his  \hA- 
icy,  286;  his  illustration  of  the  fall 
of  the  Irish  Church,  287 ;  his  Landlord 
and  Tenant  Act,  301;  mistaken  pol- 
icy, 332;  defeat  of  his  Ministry,  339. 
340;  his  parliamentary  eloquence, 
340;  his  legislation,  341;  success  of 
the  Land  Act,  341;  Education  Act  of 
1870,  342 ;  causes  of  the  defeat  of  his 
Ministry,  343 ;  faults  of  his  foreign 
policy,  344 ;  his  political  expediency, 
372. 

Goldsmith,  Oliver,  lines  on  Burke,  275. 

Gorham,  Mr.,  case  of,  375,  377;  opin- 
ions on  baptism,  376. 

Government,  British,  advantages  of  its 
forms  of,  176. 

Government,  Parliamentary,  since  the 
Revolution  of  1688,  213 :  leaders  in 
the  House  of  Commons,  214;  during 
Queen  Anne's  reign,  218:  in  fe 
time  of  Robert  Walpole,  218;  and 
Wil  iam  Pitt  and  Fox,  219. 

Graham  Sir  James,  resigns  his  seat  jn 
the  Cabinet,  101  ;  supports  free 
trade,  200;  his  suggestions  with 
regard  to  Ecclesiastical  Titles  Act, 
211. 

Grampound,  disfranchisement  of,  32. 


26 


386 


INDEX. 


Granard,  Lord,  his  idea  on  tenant- 
rif,'lit,  145. 

Grant,  Mr.,  supports  the  Reform  Bill, 
75. 

Granville,  Lord,  his  conduct  respecting 
tiie  Crimean  War,  224;  on  the  con- 
cessions of  the  United  States,  325; 
mistaken  policy,  'S'-i2. 

Grattan,  Henry,  on  the  Tithe  Act,  123; 
on  religious  teaching  in  Irel  nd,  133; 
his  speeches  on  Irish  affairs,  276, 
277,  302. 

Grenviile,  I,ord,  his  view  of  Conti- 
nental aflairs,  6;  and  of  the  corn 
duties,  191;  proposal  of  his  Minis- 
try with  respect  to  the  Army,  282; 
his  resignation,  282;  his  correspon- 
dence with  (jeorge  Washington,  331. 

Grey,  L"rd,  as  leader  of  the  Opposi- 
tion, 25;  his  Ministry,  55;  dissolu- 
tion of  Parliament,  61 ;  proposes 
second  reading  of  tlie  Reform  Bill, 
65;  speech  on  the  Reform  Bill,  68- 
70;  decision  regarding  his  resigna- 
tion, 71;  debate  on  the  postpone- 
ment of  the  disfranchising  clauses  of 
the  Uefonn  Bill,  79;  opi  ions  on  the 
amendment  to  the  Reform  Bill,  81; 
restoration  of  his  Ministry,  8J; 
passing  of  the  Reform  Bill,  8,); 
resignation  and  character,  102; 
cause  of  his  resignation,  103;  on 
the  Union  Act,  2i)l;  his  desire  for 
Reform,  347. 

Grey,  Sir  (Jeorge,  represses  agrarian 
crime,  161. 

Grote,  George,  speech  on  the  Irish 
C'luirch  question,  100;  on  Poor  Law 
AnuMidment  Act,  188;  on  the  con- 
diK  t  oi  Knglund  iu  the  American 
Civil  War,  236. 

II. 

IlAnKAs  Corpus  Act  suspended  in 
Lngland,  24. 

Hammond,  Mr.  George,  his  correspon- 
dence w  th  Mr.  .JeHerson.  331. 

ILuvwood,  Vav\  of,  his  opinions  on  the 
LVlbrm  Mill,  SO. 

IIarr(iwl)v.  Lord,  proposes  alterations 
in  thc'Ref.rm  Mill,  78. 

Ilartiiigtou,  Lord,  his  opinions  on  land 
triMire  in  Irolaiul.  144. 

lIcrlH-rt,  Dr.,  anecdote  told  hy,  127. 

llolland.  Lord,  letter  to  Mr.  Allen  re- 
garding Spanish  ufiairs,  G. 

.Home  policy,  18. 

Home  l{ule'  in  Ireland,  283;  proposals 
.regarding,  230. 


Ilubner,  Baron  de,  his  opinions  on  the 
Treaty  of  Washington,  323. 

Hud.-jon,  Sir  J.,  letter  to,  regarding 
Italian  Revolution,  223. 

Hume.  Joseph,  a  great  supporter  of 
parliamentary  reform,  53;  on  ex- 
penditure of  the  state.  205. 

Huskisson,  Mr,  his  ideas  on  parlia- 
mentary re.brm,  43;  pro|K>sals  re- 
garding free  trade,  and  their  results, 
168,  2u0 

Hutchinson,  Mr.  Hely,  on  woollen  goods 
in  IreUnd,  271. 


I. 


Income  tax,  361. 

Indian  Empire,  land  frontier  in  our, 
302;  danger  of  the,  363;  strength 
of  the,  365. 

Inglis,  .>ir  Robert,  his  speech  regarding 
the  Reform  Bill,  83;  speech  on  the 
Marriage  Bill,  119. 

Ireland,  state  of,  19;  policv  pursued  by 
Sir  Robert  Peel  .and  the  Duke  of 
Wellington,  43,  50;  state  on  the 
abandonment  of  the  Appropria- 
tion Clau-^e,  125;  'lithe  Act,  1 23; 
Established  Chiirch,  127;  discn- 
dowmtnt  of  the  Protestant  Church, 
128;  wants  overlooked.  123;  state 
of  the  Roman  Catholic  ("hurcb, 
130;  object  of  national  education, 
134  ;  religious  instruction,  13i>- 
137;  rules  of  the  National  Board 
regarding  education,  134 ;  sy.stem 
of  eduiati(»n  introduced  in  1831, 
138  ;  principle  of  the  National 
School  system,  139;  welfan',  141; 
report  of  the  ( 'onunis.*ioncrs  i>f 
National  Education,  142  ;  land 
tenure,  144,  157;  Ireland  and  Eng- 
land, 148;  tenant-right,  145;  titles 
of  the  land-owners,  151  ;  govern- 
ment, 152;  summing-up  ol  griev- 
ances, 155;  improvenu'ut.s,  155,  153; 
her  progress,  1.56;  wants,  l.'>7; 
crime,  161;  Sir  Robert  Peel's  diffi- 
culty with,  172;  suggestions  as  to 
the  improvement  of  government, 
168;  extract  from  *. Journals  upon 
Ireland,*  244;  murders.  24<>;  com> 
parison  ot'  murder  in  England  to 
murder  in  Ireland,  254;  liibbon  con- 
spiracy in,  254;  murder  of  Mrs. 
Neill.  255;  conduct  of  the  Goveni- 
nient,  256;  justice,  257;  intluencc 
of  Roman  Cath«»lic  clergy  over  the 
people,  257;  Mr  Fronde  on,  257; 
virtues  of  the  people,  258 ;  history  of 


INDEX. 


387 


the  Eoman  Catholic  reh'gion,  258; 
Mr.  Froude  ou  the  people,  261  ; 
character  of  the  people,  202;  objec- 
tions to  establishment  of  Roman 
Catholic  Church,  263;  Bishop  Law 
on  Roman  Catholic  priests,  263; 
suggestions  in  favor  of  the  endow- 
ment of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church, 
204 ;  policy  to,  264 ;  state  since 
1708,  269  ;  woollen  goods,  270 ; 
smuggling,  272  ;  Burke  on,  274  ; 
augmentation  of  volunteers,  277  ; 
state  of  affairs,  277 ;  convention  and 
resolutions,  277  ;  union  of  England 
with  Ireland,  284 ;  two  ways  of 
governing,  284;  conduct  of  England 
towards,  288;  policy  after  the  Union, 
289;  Home  Rule,  289;  government 
under  Home  Rule,  290  ;  petitions 
that  ought  to  be  granted,  291;  and 
ought  to  be  refused,  292;  national 
education,  294 ;  anecdote  of  a  priest, 
296 ;  sufferings  of  parish  priests,  296 : 
law  of  landlord  and  tenant,  298; 
ill-government,  299;  tenants,  300; 
continuation  of  grievances,  301; 
tithes,  302;  difficulties  of  govern- 
ment, 304  ;  parliamentary  repre- 
sentation in  the  time  of  Oliver 
Cromwell,  358. 

Irish  Church,  Lord  Russell  on  the,  97, 
99  ;  resolution  on  the.  111  ;  Mr. 
Gladstone's  speech,  241  ;  courses 
pursued  with  regard  to  the,  259; 
Dr.  Arnold's  opinions,  262;  policy 
of  Mr.  Gladstone,  286;  success  of 
Mr.  Gladstone's  Bill,  341;  sugges- 
tions as  to  its  government,  359. 

Italy,  sympathy  towards  the"  people  of, 
229 ;  correspondence  with  Sir  J. 
Hudson,  229 ;  letter  to  the  Marquis 
d'Azeglio,  234;  her  policy,  293  ; 
marriage  and  educatioa  in,  293. 


J. 


Jefferson,  Mr.,    his  correspondence 

with  Mr.  George  Hammond,  331. 
Jeffrey,  Francis,  election  of,  268. 
John  Bull,  description  of,  344. 
'  Journals  upon  Ireland,'  extract  from, 

244. 
Juan,  surrender  of  the  island  of,  327 ; 

dispute     regarding    boundary-line, 

328. 
Judicature,  Bill  of,  in  Houses  of  Lords 

and  Commons,  379. 


K. 

King,  Locke,  his  motion  on  County 
Franchise,  211. 


Lambton,  Mr.,  supports  parliamentary 
reform,  36. 

Landlords  and  tenants,  letter  from  Lord 
Portsmouth  about,  149  ;  '  Daily 
News  '  and  '  Spectator  '  on,  149; 
'Times'  conclusion  regarding,  150  ; 
derivation  of  the  titles  of  Irish  land- 
lords, 151. 

Land  question,  tenant-right  in  Ireland, 
145  ;  Lord  Granard's  ideas,  145  ; 
Lord  Hartington's  opinions,  144; 
custom  of  tenant-right  in  Ulster, 
146 ;  '  Times '  correspondent's  re- 
port, 148 ;  Lord  Portsmouth's  letter, 
149  ;  tenants  and  landlords,  150; 
religion  of  landlords,  151 ;  sugges- 
tions, 152;  Mr.  Fitzgibbon's  pam- 
f)hlet,  153 ;  tenancy  of  land,  153  ; 
and  tenure  in  Ireland,  157 ;  success 
of  Mr.  Gladstone's  Act,  341. 

Lansdowne,  Lord,  joins  the  Cabinet 
of  Mr.  Canning,  44;  insists  upon 
inspection  in  the  schools  of  the 
National  Society,  123;  course  pur- 
sued with  regard  to  the  Irish  Church, 
259  ;  and  national  education,  307; 
appoints  Inspector  of  Education, 
309. 

Laval,  Duke  of,  anecdote  of,  368. 

Law,  Bishop,  on  Roman  Catholic 
priests,  263. 

Leinster,  Duke  of,  anecdote  of,  341. 

Liberal  party,  strength  in  1835  of  the, 
116 ;  measures  which  owe  their  suc- 
cess to  the,  116. 

Liberal-Tories  and  free  trade,  202. 

Lindsay,  Mr.,  on  the  results  of  the 
Navigation  Act,  175. 

Liverpool,  Lord,  his  character,  20 ; 
death,  41. 

London,  threatened  disturbances  in, 
206. 

Lords,  House  of,  second  reading  of  the 
Relbrm  Bill,  65;  rejection  of  the 
Reform  Bill,  71;  doubts  regarding 
the  passing  of  the  Kefbrm  Bill  in  the, 
77 ;  steps  taken  to  procure  a  majority 
on  the  Reform  Bill,  77-79;  division 
on  the  bill,  79;  bill  in  committee, 
79 ;  third  reading  of  the  Reform  Bill, 
89;  question  as  to  the  vote,  89  ;  de- 
fect in  the  composition  of  the  House. 
178 ;  advantages  of  a  House  of  Peers, 


888 


INDEX. 


179-181 ;  second  reading  of  the  Bill 
for  the  repeal  of  Navigation  Laws, 
209  ;  Landlord  and  Tenant  Act  in 
the,  301 ;  on  the  Treaty  of  Wash- 
ington, 326;  opposition  to  the  Bill 
of  Judicature,  379. 

Louis  XVL,  government  of,  368. 

Lowe,  Right  Hon.  K.,  Chancellor  of  the 
Exchequer,  242  ;  on  education  in 
1839,  308. 

Lyndhurst,  Lord,  on  the  postponement 
of  the  disfranchising  clauses  of  the 
Keform  Bill,  79;  his  efforts  to  form 
a  Tory  Government,  83. 


M. 


Macaulat,  Lord,  on  William  Pitt's 
conduct,  213 ;  on  William,  Lord 
Kussell,  286. 

Mackintosh,  Sir  James,  on  the  legality 
of  the  Teterloo  meeting,  287. 

Manchester,  petition  of,  in  I'avor  of  the 
Keform  Bill,  86;  Peterloo  meeting 
at,  287. 

Manslieid,  Lord,  and  the  position  of 
Dissenters,  313;  judgment  in  Cham- 
berlain V.  Allen  Evans  case,  316. 

Marriages,  civil,  117;  legalitv  of,  119; 
Bill  of  1836,  119;  speech  of  Sir 
Robert  Inglis,  119 ;  speech  of  Earl 
Russell,  120;  speech  by  the  Bishop 
of  Exeter,  120;  suggestions  regard- 
ing, 121,  122. 

Mason  Mr.,  Confederate  Commissioner, 
interview  with  Earl  Russell,  227. 

Massachusetts,  schools  in,  319. 

Mayne,  Sir  Richard,  suppresses  the 
Chartist  riots,  208. 

Maynooth  College,  measures  for  its 
endowment  by  Sir  Robert  Peel, 
173;  discontent  in  England  at,  173. 

Mayo,  Lord,  his  speech  on  the  state  of 
Ireland,  283. 

Melbourne,  Lord,  forms  an  Adminis- 
tration, 105;  dismissal  by  the  King, 
107;  cause,  108;  capability  in  otHce, 
108;  return  to  power,  111;  dislike 
to  Lord  Brougham,  111;  his  charac- 
ter compared  with  Lord  Brougham's, 
115;  sketch  of  his  administration, 
171,  172;  interview  with  Earl  Rus- 
sell, 184. 

Melville,  Lord,  216. 

Metternich,  Count,  on  the  state  of 
Kngland,  206. 

Milton,  John,  lines  on  religious  liberty, 
374. 

Minto,  Lord,  as  head  of  the  Admiralty, 
185. 


Mundella,  Mr.,  re-election  of,  344. 
Murray,  Archbishop,    on    reading    of 
Bible  in  National  Schools,  294. 


N. 

National  Societv,  foundation  of  the, 
306;  grants  to,' 309. 

Navi''ation  Act,  repeal  of  the,  175;  re- 
sult, 175  ;  second  reading,  209. 

Neill,  Mrs.,  murder  of,  in  Ireland,  255. 

Newcastle,  Duke  of,  his  comraissiou  on 
national  education,  124. 

Newton,  Sir  Isaac,  resigns  seat  in  Par- 
liament, 339. 

Nicholson,  Mr.,  attempted  murder  of 
in  Ireland,  253. 

Nonconformists,  317. 

'  No  Popery  '  cry,  283. 

o. 

O'CONNELL,  Mr.,  111. 
O'Connor,  Fergus,  as  head  of  the  Chart- 
ist riots,  208. 
O'Keeffe,  Father,  case  of,  295. 
Oratory  in  the  House  of  Commons,  45. 
Orleans,  Duke  of,  King  of  France,  368. 


'  Pall  Mall  Gazettb,'  extract  from, 
319. 

Palmerston,  Lord,  his  policy  in  the 
l'2ast,  183-185 ;  as  Secretary  tor  For- 
eign Affairs,  211;  foreign  poliry, 
226;  adheres  to  the  retention  of 
Canada,  o24. 

Paris,  treaty  of,  1856,  366. 

Parliamentary  representation,  15;  in 
the  time  of  Oliver  Cromwell,  358. 

Peel,  Sir  Robert,  leader  of  the  House 
of^  Commons,  47;  on  the  Catholic 
Relief  Bill,  48;  policy  pursued  t«»w- 
ards  Ireland,  49,  50;  on  the  LV- 
forin  Bill,  64;  opposes  the  itetbnn 
Bill,  75;  refuses  to  accept  ollice, 
83;  conduct  compared  with  that  of 
the  Duke  of  Wellington,  83;  asked 
to  form  a  government  and  advises 
dissolution,  lOD;  )x)sition  in  the 
House  of  Commons,  109,  110;  re- 
signs, 111;  his  opposition  to  free 
trade,  168;  inauguration  of  new 
Ministry,  171;  success  of  his  ad- 
ministration, 172;  dilfuulty  wi  h 
Ireland,  172^  Maynooth  Act,  173; 
avcupts   otlice,    1U2;    taults    of  his 


INDEX. 


389 


policy,  193;  concessions  of,  195; 
on  repeal  of  the  Coru-laws,  195; 
resignation  of,  198 ;  su,  porter  of 
free  trade,  200;  his  views  as  to 
educational  societies,  309;  chief 
heads  of  his  policy,  346;  his  Cabinet 
rejects  reform,  347  ;  his  imposition 
of  the  income  tax,  361. 

Percival,  Mr.,  author  of  the  'No 
Popery'  cry,  283. 

Perratt,  Baron,  317. 

Philosophical  Radicals  on  the  expendi- 
ture of  the  IState,  205;  their  defeat, 
_  206,  348. 

Pitt,  William,  his  sketch  of  a  restored 
Europe,  17;  ideas  of  home  policy, 
18;  objections  to  parliamentary  re- 
form, 30;  policy,  194;  Macaulay 
on  the  conduct  of,  213;  his  charac- 
ter as  leader  of  the  House  of  Com- 
mons, 219;  encourages  the  Roman 
*  Catholics  of  Ireland,  278;  letter  to, 

from  George  III.,  279;  differences 
with  Fox,  281;  death,  282. 

Pliny,  l^roconsul  of  Trajan,  denounces 
Christianity,  132. 

Plunket,  Mr.,  his  reputation  as  an 
orator,  46. 

Political  affairs,  1701-1800,  216. 

Poor  Laws,  51-54;  reform  of,  intro- 
duction of  bill  by  Lord  Althorp,  96. 

Pope  on  English  commerce,  204. 

Portsmouth,  Lord,  his  letter  regarding 
tenants  and  landlords,  149. 

Press,  influence  of  Government  over 
the,  292. 

Private  bills,  289. 

Protection  of  Life  Bill,  198;  division 
on,  198. 

Protestant  Church  of  England,  and 
the  doctrines  of  the  Roman  Catho- 
lic Church,  129,  130,  352. 

Protestant  Church  in  Ireland,  opinions 
ot  Mr.  Gladstone  on  the,  284;  Earl 
Russell  on,  284. 

Puscy,  Dr.,  his  opinion  on  the  judg- 
ment of  Mr.  Gorham's  case,  379. 


Q. 

Quarterly  Review,'  extract  from, 
respecting  Reform  Bill,  36,  37. 


Reform,  notions  prevailing  about,  26; 
opinions  on,  26,  27;  state  of,  in 
1819,  28-40;  Sir  Francis  Burdett 
on,  30  i  Mr.   Lambtou  on,  36;    re- 


jected by  Sir  Robert  Peel's  Cabinet, 
347;  jn  the  ap(jroaching  sesfcious, 
357 ;  suggestions  regarding  future, 
358;  admission  of  householders  to 
vote  in  counties,  372;  project  of 
Oliver  Cromwell  suggested  as  a 
model,  372. 

Reform  Bill,  supporters  of,  38;  for- 
mation of  committee,  56,  57 ;  effect 
of  its  introduction  on  the  House  of 
Commons,  58,  59;  second  reading, 
60,  63;  Sir  Robert  Peel's  opinion  on, 
64;  discussions,  64;  second  read- 
ing in  the  House  of  Lords,  65 ;  Lord 
Brougham's  speech,  65;  Lord  Grey's 
speech,  68;  rejection  in  the  House 
of  Lords,  70;  revision  of  list  of 
boroughs,  72 ;  steps  taken  for  ascer- 
taining the  boundaries  of  boroughs, 
72-74;  disfranchisement  of  seats  in 
Parliament,  74;  third  reading,  75-, 
finally  passed  in  1832,  and  results, 
76;  doubts  regarding  its  passing  in 
the  House  of  Lords,  77;  alterations 
proposed  by  Lords  Harrowby  and 
Wharncliffe,  78 ;  steps  taken  in  the 
House  of  Lords  to  procure  a  ma- 
jority, 77-79;  its  passing,  79;  in 
committee,  79;  an  amendment,  79- 
81;  excitement  in  London  respect- 
ing, 84,  86;  debate,  86;  Sir  Robert 
Inglis  on,  86;  passes  through  com- 
mittee, 89;  receives  the  royal  as- 
sent, 89;  Reform  of  1867  and  Min- 
istry, 239. 

Reformers  compared  with  Ritualists, 
352. 

Religious  instruction  in  Ireland,  135- 
137. 

Religious  liberty,  Corporation  and  Test 
Acts,  186-188. 

Revolutionary  War,  distinct  periods  of, 
1,4. 

Ribbon  conspiracy  in  Ireland,  254. 

Richmond,  Duke  of,  resigns  his  seat 
in  the  Cabinet,  101. 

Ripon,  Earl,  his  resignation,  101. 

Ritualists,  compared  with  reformers, 
352;  evidence  of  Scripture  again.st, 
353;  defeated  on  the  Bill  of  Judi- 
cature, 379. 

Robespierre,  368. 

Roebuck,  Mr.,  re-election  of,  344. 

Roman  Catholic  question,  40. 

Roman  Catholics,  admitted  to  power, 
195 ;  history  of  the  religion  of,  258 ; 
new  franchise  granted  to,  298; 
claims  of  the,  278,  283. 

Roniiin  Catholic  Church  in  Ireland, 
influence  of  the  clergy,  257;  rec- 
ommendations of  endowment  of  the, 


390 


INDEX. 


201 :  Dr.  Arnold's  opinions,  2G2;  ob- 
jections to  establishment,  20-} ;  Bishop 
J.UW  on  priests,  203 ;  su<;^estions  in 
favorof  the  endowment,  2(ii;  its  pres- 
ent state,  2iJ6:  anecdote  of  a  priest, 
2,H') ;  sufierings  of  parish  priests,  290 ; 
suggestions  respecting,  2J7. 

Roman  Empire,  morals  of  the,  131. 

Home,  the  Church  of,  321;  its  symbol- 
ical worship.  349;  its  intentions, 
351 ;  its  theologians,  353. 

Romilly,  Sir  .John,  introduces  the 
Encumbered  Estates  Bill  for  Ireland, 
159. 

Rosse,  Lord,  on  Ireland,  244. 

Russell,  Earl,  elected  member  of  Parlia- 
ment, 1;  visits  his  brother,  8;  at  the 
head-quarters  of  Lord  Wellington, 
8;  bt't  regarding  the  lines  of  Torres 
Vcdnis,  9 ;  in  company  with  Lord 
Wellington  during  the  time  of  the 
Peninsular  War,  10,  11;  meets  Lord 
\\cllington  at  Cadiz,  11;  interview 
•with  Napoleon  Bonaparte  at  Elba, 
13;  reform  discouraged,  34;  speech 
on  relbrm;  37;  success  of,  38;  effects 
of  the  introduction  of  reform  on  the 
House  of  Commons,  TjS,  59;  second 
reading  of  Reform  Bill.  GO,  03;  car- 
ried, in  1832,  70;  and  its  results,  70; 
speech  upon  tlie  Irish  Church  ques- 
tion, 97,  98;  dissatisfaction  regarding 
speech,  99  ;  offer  of  leadership  of  the 
House  of  Commons,  107;  leader  of 
the  Liberal  party,  110;  speech  on 
the  Marriage  liill,  120;  scliome  of 
education,  123  ;  opinions  on  Encum- 
bered Estates  Act,  ICO;  takes  interest 
in  colonial  affairs,  102;  colonial  pol- 
icy of,  102;  PAotion  on  free  trade 
defeated,  109;  relation  to  the  Whig 
party,  174;  remarks  on  his  parlia- 
ijientaty  work,  J8l  ;  doubts  about 
the  I'astom  nuostion,  184;  interview 
with  Lord  >I('ll)(>urnc,  184;  consults 
Duke  of  Wellington  iipon  affairs, 
18(i;  considerations  of,  180-188;  and 
corn  dutii'S,  191;  votes  against  Pro- 
tection of  Life  hill,  198;  his  Minis- 
try, 198;  on  free  trade,  200;  opposes 
the  Philosophical  Radicals,  200 ;  the 
Chartist  riotSj  207;is  supported  by 
the  House  ot  Lords,  20!t;  enemies, 
209  ;  introduction  of  ICcclesiastiral 
Titles  Act,  210;  caricature  of,  210; 
relation  with  Lord  Palmcrston.  211; 
resigns  office,  2 1 1 ;  letters  regarding 
Italian  revolution,  229;  foreign  pol- 
icy, 220;  extract  from  speeches  and 
despatches,  220;  interview  with  Mr. 
Blason,  227;  on  the  'Alabama,'  228; 


letter  to  Marquis  d'Azeglio.  234;  as 
First  Lord  of  the  Treasury,  23tJ; 
resignation  as  head  of  the  Whig- 
Radical  party,  242;  political  charac- 
ter, 285;  hi*s  policy,  347;  his  own 
impression  of  his  reception  in  public 
life,  350. 

Russell,  Lord  William,  Lord  Macaulay 
on,  280. 

Russia,  her  quarrel  with  Turkey,  221; 
treaty  with  1  urke}',  223;  inientions 
towards  Austria,  337  ;  power  of, 
304;  her  dangers,  305;  objections 
to  Treaty  of  Paris,  1850,  366. 


S. 


Sacheverell  clause,  339,  340. 

Salisbury,  Lord,  advises  railway  along 
the  Indus,  305. 

St.  Juan,  surrender  of,  327;  dispute 
about  bound. I ry  line,  329;  want  of 
policy  on  the  part  of  the  British 
Government,  330-334;  correspond- 
ence between  the  two  Governments, 
331,  332. 

Salt,  Mr.,  his  scheme  of  religious  educa- 
tion, 320. 

Sawyer.  Sir  Robert,  member  of  Parlia- 
ment, 339. 

Scotlan(l.  jwlicy  towards,  264;  Union 
of,  205  ;  government  of,  266;  par- 
liamentary representation  in,  207; 
political  liberty  in,  267;  parliamen- 
tary representation  iu  the  lime  of 
Oliver  Cromwell,  367;  farming  in, 
300. 

Scripture,  ouoting  of.  in  politics,  118. 

Selborne,  Lord,  his  opinions  on  Dr. 
Williams  and  Mr.  Wilson's  case, 
377;  opposes  the  Bill  of  Judicature. 
379. 

Senior,  Mr.  Nassau,  extract  from  his 
Journal,  244. 

Shakespeare's  'King  Henry  V.,'  ex- 
tract from,  200. 

'  She  Stoops  to  Conquer,'  extract  from, 
344. 

Shuttleworth,  Sir  James  Kaye,  ap- 
pointed Inspector  of  lulucation.  309. 

Sidniwiith,  Lord,  his  means  of  discover- 
ing insurrectionists,  24. 

Slavery,  abolition  of,  and  grants  to  the 
owners  of  slaves,  348 

Sobral.  description  of  the  fort  of,  9. 

Somci-s,  Lord,  his  speech  on  the  Union 
of  Scotland,  205. 

Somerville,  Lord,  306. 

Spanish  Canon,  anecdote  of  a.  851. 

hpanish  War,  5;  opinions  regarding,  7. 


INDEX. 


391 


Speeches  and  Despatches,  vol.  ii.,  ex- 
tracts from,  226,  227. 

l^^peiicer,  Lord,  215. 

IStael,  Madame  de,  her  designation  of 
the  Tories  of  England,'  340. 

Stanhope,  Colonel  -lames,  conducts  Earl 
Kussell  to  the  head-quarters  of  the 
Duke  of  Wellington,  8. 

Stanley,  Lord,  cliief  secretary  to  the 
Lord-Lieutenant  of  Ireland,  56  ;  a 
staunch  supporter  cf  the  Kelorm  Bill. 
75;  speech  on  the  Coercion  Bill, 
92;  appointed  Secretary  of  State  for 
the  Colonies,  94;  retires  from  the 
Cabinet,  101;  on  religious  instruc- 
tion, 308. 

Stansfeld,  Mr.,  his  opinion  of  the  Edu- 
cation Act  of  ]  870,  311. 

Stephen,  Mr.,  his  estimate  of  loss  by 
planters  incurred  by  abolition  of 
slavery,  348. 

Stopford,  Admiral,  at  the  taking  of 
Acre,  185. 

Sugar  duties,  190;  division  on,  199. 

Sussex,  Duke  of,  300. 

Swift,  Dean,  on  the  Duke  of  Monmouth, 
343. 


T. 

Taylor,    Sir   Herbert,  his    influence 

with  the  King,  88. 
Taylor,  Mr.,    his  estimate   of  loss  by 

planters    incurred    by   aboliiion    of 

slavery,  348. 
Tenant-right  in  Ireland,  LnrdGranard's 

idea  on,  145;  custom  of,  in   Lister, 

146;    unsuitable  to  Kerry  or  Cork, 

140. 
Tenants  in  Ireland,  300., 
Thiers,    M.,    form    of  government    in 

France,  recommended  b}',  309. 
Tiorney,  Mr.,  joins  the  Cabinet  of  Mr. 

Canning,  44;    on   the  dilHculties  of 

holding  office,  211. 
'  Times  '  correspondent's  report  on  the 

Land    q:;estion     in     Ireland,     148  ; 

conclusions  regarding  Tenants  and 

Landlords,    150  ;   and  the  Cabinet, 

292 ;  on  the  strength  of  the  empire, 

345. 
Tippoo  Saib  on  the  British  Army,  365. 
Tithes,  commutation  of,  116;  registra- 
tion of  births,  117. 
Tithes  in  Ireland,  speech  by  Grattan, 

802. 
Torres    Vedras,   head-quarters  of  the 

Duke  of  Wellington,  bet  regarding, 

9. 
Tory  pnrty,  error  of  the,  in  1815,  14; 


separation  under  Canning,  44  ;  rupt- 
ure of  the,  49 ;  observations  on  the, 
174;  policy  of,  194-196;  changes  of 
policy,  197;  opinions  of,  210;  chiefs 
of  the,  346. 

Trajan,  Emperor,  treatment  of  Chris- 
tians, 132. 

Trench,  Mr.,  on  the  Ribbon  conspiracy, 
168  ;  extract  from  '  Realities  of  Irish 
Life,'  246;  his  description  of  murder, 
247. 

'  Trent,'  seizure  on  board  the,  226. 

Turkey,  her  quarrel  with  Russia,  221. 

Turkish  Empire,  state  of  the,  in  1840, 
167. 


u. 

Ulster,  custom  of  tenant-right  in,  146. 

United  States,  behavior  to  the  British 
Government,  226 ;  ambition  of  the, 
362 ;   '  Buncome  '  speeches  in,  303. 

University  Bill,  292. 


V. 

Victoria,  Queen,  accession  of,  186. 


w. 

Walcheren  Expedition,  216. 

Waller  ou  English  commerce,  204. 

Walpole,  Sir  R.,  his  decisions  on  home 
policy,  34;  his  character  as  leader  of 
the  House  of  Commons,  218. 

Warburton,  Mr.  Henry,  letter  of,  189  ; 
gives  advice  to  the  Government, 
189;  suggests  penny  postage,  190. 

Ward,  Mr.,  his  motion  upon  the  Irish 
Church  question,  99. 

Washington,  Baron  de  Hiibner's  opin- 
ions on  the  treaty  of,  323;  opinions 
of  the  public  and  the  Americans, 
324;  points  in  support  of  .American 
opinion,  325;  British  honor  tarnished 
by  the  treaty,  366. 

Washington,  George,  his  correspond- 
ence with  Lord  Grenville,  331. 

Wellesley,  Lord,  and  Lord  Wellington, 

n. 

Wellington,  Lord,  at  Pero  Nero,  8; 
conversation  regarding  the  holding 
of  Torres  Vedras,  10 ;  his  conduct 
during  the  Peninsular  War,  10;  dif- 
ficulty with  regard  to  the  army  in 
the  Peninsula,  11;  coolness  of,  12; 
his  policy   towards  Ireland,  49,  50; 


392 


INDEX. 


announces  the  fall  of  his  povern- 
nieiit,  51  ;  his  conduct  couipared 
with  that  of  Sir  Robert  I'eel,  83; 
offers  to  form  a  government,  83: 
deputes  Mr.  IJarinic  to  form  a  gov- 
ernmfent,  84;  and  tails.  87;  iiis  opin- 
ion on  the  Chartist  riots,  207. 

Wiiarncliflfe,  Lord,  proposes  alterations 
in  the  Reform  Bill,  78 ;  his  opinion 
of  the  amendments  to  it,  81. 

Whately,  Archbishop,  on  the  rending 
of  the  IJible  in  National  Schools,  234. 

Whig  opposition,  25. 

Whig  party,  error  of  the,  regarding  the 
Spanish  War,  6  ;  its  state  since  1688, 


34;  considerations  on  the.  34;  ob- 
jects un  -er  Fox,  35;  changes  arcnm- 
plished  from  1830-I8f>0,  174;  its 
recent  downfall  of  power,  340, 

William  III  ,  his  management  of 
foreign  and  domestic  affairs,  217. 

William  IV.,  his  speech  on  the  opening 
of  Parliament.  18{4,  94;  death,  ISO; 
conduct  duiing  his  reign,  186. 

Williams,  Dr..  before  the  .Judicial 
Committee  of  Privy  ('ouncil,  377. 

Wilton,  Henry  Hristow,  IJ.D.,  before 
the  Judicial  Committee  of  Privy 
Council,  377. 

Wood,  Mr.  John,  321. 


Cambridge:  Press  of  John  WUsoa  aud  Soa. 


HOME  USE 

CIRCULATION  DEPARTMENT 

MAIN  LIBRARY 

This  book  is  due  on  the  last  date  stamped  below. 
1-month  loans  may  be  renewed  by  calling  642-3405. 
6-month  loans  may  be  recharged  by  bringing  books 

to  Circulation  Desk. 
Renewals  and  recharges  may  be  made  4  days  prior 

to  due  date. 

ALL  BOOKS  ARE  SUBJECT  TO  RECALL  7  DAYS 

AFTER  DATE  CHECKED  OUT. 


BEC.  CIR.      FEB  I  ?  np. 


INTt:RLIBRARY  LOAN 


m.  6  - 1984 


- UNIV.  OF  feAUtf..  flSttK- 


WO 


juH  3  0  mi 


Lr)2 


A-40mft.'75 


General  Library 

University  of  California 

Berkeley 


GENERAL  LIBBflBV-u.C.  BERKELEY 


"^Iria 


THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


*. 

^ 


)      : 


s   I 


